Success: Media BLITZ!

We got their attention. Now, we need your help to get this in the national media. Please take a moment to send these links to your favorite publications. Some suggestions include DRUDGE Report, CNN, and USA Today. Enjoy!

UPDATE, SAT Aug 23 2:11PM: We’re getting some national coverage. See “new” links below:

KTVK-TV 3: VIDEO: “Many protest radar in Scottsdale”

KTVK-TV 3: 9PM (More extensive follow up video)

(NEW!) has picked up the Tribune article

AZCentral: Speed camera protesters say “Honk for Privacy”

East Valley Trib: Protestors bash photo radar at protest

KTAR 92.3FM’s coverage (ran promos for this story all day)

KNXV-TV ABC 15 – People in Scottsdale Protest Photo Radar

The Arizona Republic featured us in their Saturday print edition (see “Valley and State”)

The East Valley Tribune also featured us in their Saturday print edition.

Photo.BLORGE (Australia) has picked up the story

(NEW!) Phoenix New Times mentioned CameraFRAUD, linking to the KTAR story

KPHO 5 or KPNX 12 were also present, (waiting on footage)

(Even Cat Galaxy Media was present, a special-interest “Cat-talk” net radio station. )

If you attended, please post a reply to this message about your experience today!

69 Responses to Success: Media BLITZ!

  1. i wont mention which company, but an internal memo went out today ordering employees to not visit camera fraud.

    the scary thing is, the management isn’t scared or worried. they will try to bully you the whole way, and fight to keep you off the ballot. they think they are above the law.

    Sent via Blackberry

  2. RPr says:

    The camera’s are coming down.

  3. mike says:

    Photo radar is easy to defeat, i have the best radar detector on the market and can smelll those bacon wagons from a mile away. DPS is in with the governor to generate money so that they can pay for their next trip to hooters. so screw them all. get the cheetah mirror and best radar detector and your good togo.

  4. former cop says:

    In the old days, the “charging officer” had to witness the crime. Cameras/video can be altered, edited, etc.


  5. RPr says:

    they dont calibrate them instead charge you with not driving a reasonable and prudent speed

  6. 4409 says:

    The cameras went in “without” a vote and they will be removed “without” a vote!

    For those ranting about the intergrity and calibration of the “enforcement” tools

    There is no intergrity and how do you calibrate a tool that is used in an act of fraud?

  7. I got a chuckle out of the DPS statement that they did months of testing and certification. It would be interesting to get a copy of that report. If it exists. To see how cops design accurate, demonstrable, reproducible measurements and statistically compile data.

  8. zippy says:

    I was the guy in the red mustang taking pictures. I’ll facebook them and put them on my site. Here’s some karma for you:

    South of the demonstration, just north of Oak on NB Scottsdale road, there was a mobile photo radar van snapping away. If you got more honks from the northbounders, that must be part of the reason.

    Keep hammering.

  9. zippy says:

    also showed you a lot of love. The protest was the top story on their breaking news page for a couple of hours at the end of the work day.

  10. Brock Dodge says:

    You all are a bunch of losers! The laws you break kill people. Get a fucking life!!

  11. zippy says:

    Brock Dodge is off base.
    1. Presumption of innocence.
    2. Right to confront your accuser
    3. No one is saying traffic violations should not be cited. We are saying respect people’s Constitutional rights for one thing. Why do you not support the Constitution, Brock?
    4. Due process of law. How can we trust a foreign commercial enterprise to execute police power? Why should citizens be expected to forgo important protections because of a govenrmental desire to raise revenue without calling it “taxes.” They’re not there for safety Brock. They’re there to make money at the expense of your rights. The Governor, who I support on many things, has even budgeted speed camera revenues in increasing amounts in future budgets. If it were about safety, and this privacy intruding cameras really worked, revenues should go DOWN, as more and more people learn and change their behavior.

  12. wackos says:

    Well, so where does one get the right to speed? Does it come in the mail with your license from the DMV? Or to you get it from being dropped on your head to often? The point is if you speed, (of which you have no public right to do) and get got by any means to protect the general public at large, you must pay the consequences. Whether you are caught by camera or officer makes no difference, you are still violating the law and endangering the lives of others. You have no precieved right to privacy in public.

  13. camerafraud says:

    “Wackos” and “Brock” are obviously lackeys from ATS or Redflex, and apparently they have some serious reading/listening comprehension problems.

    No one is promoting speeding. Were you asleep during our multiple interviews? How can one dispute our core arguments: “more cops, not cameras” and “cameras don’t catch drunks”?

    The cameras ARE coming down.

  14. zippy says:

    we have the right to due process of law. We have the right to the presumption of innocence. We have a right to proof of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

    Why do you hate your own rights. why are you so willing to surrender your rights to a private, for-profit company?

    If I violate the law, convict me FAIRLY. Don’t stack the deck with fallible machines, unsupervised by actual police officers (in reality). If the city of Scottsdale were truly in favor of safety and law enforcement,, the revenues would not be part of the budget. They would use real cops exercising realy judgment and observation.

    We are not cattle. we are citizens and tax payers. Respect our rights.

  15. wackos says:

    I don’t work for anyone or in the camera industry I am self employed. I do care about speeding cars, they are a a danger to all drivers. Yes, drunks may not be caught via cameras, if they speed they might. I am an advocate of cameras for safety in public areas, parks, downtown, roads and even in the workplace. The interesting part is that the people who are complaining about the cameras are the very people speeding! Again, in public you have no right to privacy, I or anyone else can snap your photo at anytime anywhere, and I do. I have a video camera connected to my private vehicle and I carry a video and digital camera for quick shots of autos and people who violate the law. I am a private citizen.

  16. Scott says:

    Brock and Wackos sound like something from Nazi Germany in 1938, and I remember those attitudes very well.. Ignorance kills you after it takes away all your civil rights. Sadly, I lived through that era.

  17. camerafraud says:

    “wackos,” thanks for admitting we’re right on safety, and I quote you now: “yes, drunks may not be caught via cameras.”

    Cameras don’t catch drunks.

    You advocate cameras in just about every area of life, and I respect your opinion even though I disagree. London is a good example of the dystopia you advocate, and their crime stats speak for themselves: all-time records for murder, theft, assult, you name it.

    You allege that the people complaining are the people speeding: I say, prove it. Thanks to our friday protest, we actually slowed traffic down 5 – 10 MPH from people trying to read our signs. Perhaps we need more protests, not cameras?

    I don’t blame you for having a camera connected to your vehicle. That’s a wise decision considering the litigious society we live in. Just think, you might be able to use your own footage in the future to fight a fraudulent photo scam ticket!

    Anyways, mark my words: The cameras ARE coming down.

  18. wackos says:

    Looks like everyone is getting a little to serious about this conversation. It is simple, don’t speed, don’t endanger ours and you won’t get a ticket. You can speed if you want, just don’t kill or hurt others in the process and if you do get caught don’t be a whinny baby. We really should make ALL traffic violations a capital crime.

  19. camerafraud says:

    Looks like you are backpedaling, “wackos.”

    I agree, don’t speed. But don’t allow RedFlex to LIE and forge traffic citations. Surely, “wackos,” you would agree that if the cameras work so well, why does Redflex have to forge their documents and get reprimanded by the AZ Sec of State for breaking no less than four laws?

    Or, do you think it’s okay to break the law to enforce it?

  20. wackos says:

    No backpedaling, same thought don’t speed. You are making an allegation without presenting proof. I go back to my thought. This is not about Redflex, not about cameras or anyone else, except you and your level of obeying the laws of the state of Arizona. I was brought up to obey the law, that is the right and moral thing to do. It comes from the heart, not the gas pedal! Anyway, all traffic violations really should be capital crimes. See ya!

  21. zippy says:


    The only thing we can rely on, to be and remain free, is due process. This does not mean the decision is always right, it means that the decision is always fair. Cameras themselves violate due process. the system of citation coerces waivers of due process. the revenue stream generated by cameras encourages convictions over decisions on the merits.

    Give us real cops citing the boneheads making the roads unsafe, and the debate is over. Take the for profit companies out of it, and let the citizens decide if and where, if ever, we want ticketing machines installed, rather than having Mary Manross and Janet sold a bill of goods to meet budget shortfalls.

    Traffic safety should not come at the expense of Constitutional rights. Making it a revenue stream encourages ticket generation regardless of whether safety is improved.

    The privacy concern is not pictures; it’s a foreign for profit company being given carte blanche to peer into our personal lives (and data) because Scottsdale outsourced policing duties to a machine.

    Wake up.

    I don’t think you can ever be too serious about defending your own rights.

  22. wackos says:

    Just one more time for the record, no one in the USA has the right to privacy in the public domain, period. The is no presumption of privacy while driving on the roads of Arizona, these cameras are not now nor ever have been a Constitutional issue.

  23. 4409 says:

    We don’t need more cops either that is for sure!

  24. camerafraud says:

    Since when is what’s in my vehicle considered “public domain”?

    My vehicle is private property.

    My money is private property.

    Just because you can peer through a window with a high-powered camera that is precision-mounted, doesn’t mean something is “public domain.”

  25. 4409 says:

    Wacko you are wrong!

    When did I give a company permission to use my name, photo, and likeness for commercial-for-profit use?

    If you’re a tourist and I happen to be in a photo you take YES you are correct. Not for a private corporation in bed with the government commiting fraud!

  26. wackos says:

    As long as you are walking down the street, driving your car, shopping, anywhere out in public you are in the public domain and have no right to precieved privacy. It is simple I don’t speed and I make sure that I don’t, I use my cruise and I check speed limit signs for the road I am driving. Just obey the law, it is simple, stop whinning!

  27. RPr says:

    this is video from 3tv at 9pm it is the best coverage i have seen from media in a long time

  28. RPr says:

    wackos says:

    just because you are a good driver doesnt stop you from rear ending the nut in front of you that slams on his breaks.

    Rear end collisions have increased 54% in the city of Scottsdale since they installed the Photo Radar cams

  29. wackos says:

    OK this will be it for me. If the state of Arizona would just make all traffice violations a capital crime, then maybe the state wouldn’t need the cameras. Some have said more officers, ok, then who wants to pay for additional taxes to cover that one? Cameras are cheaper, that is why the state wants to use them. There is a shortage of police officers all across the nation from ciities to state patrols, would you rather have no officers or would you rather give them some help to be a little more effecient? It is a tough call, I still vote for more cameras. Thanks for the comments, some of you are a little too serious!

  30. John says:

    I am not for speeding. I am against cities lowering speed limits arbitrarily, or reducing the duration of the yellow light and radar vans or speed cameras established there to catch the speeder. I am also for speed limits that reflect actual practice, (i.e., 55 mph speed limits on 101 when everyone is doing 70 – 75 except for the person who is doing 55 and causing a dangerous backup in what would otherwise be safe traffic).

    You have cities putting in speed cameras, setting speed limits, and receiving the revenue from speeding tickets without any oversight. Time and time again, you read articles about small cities whose revenue suddenly goes up (sometimes by a factor of 3) when a speed camera is installed. And we are supposed to believe that the cameras are installed for the purpose of traffic safety? It seems to me that we have allowed cities and the state to tap another revenue source without any representation or oversight from elected officials.

    I would love to see a state law that says that any revenue realized from speed cameras or radar vans goes into the general highway fund. Then let’s see how many speed cameras and radar vans stay on the road – my guess is that the number of cameras and vans would go WAY down.

  31. Scott says:

    Wacko says make traffic violations a capital crime (tongue in cheek I hope)…then, of course, if you make an honest mistake the state is free to hang you, or maybe shoot you in groups in a pre-dug ditch.

  32. Brock Dodge says:

    Don’t break the law and you don’t have to worry about it.

  33. camerafraud says:

    You’re right, Brock: Redflex should stop breaking the law.

    To be exact, the AZ Sec of State said Redflex’s notary broke no fewer than four laws!

    Cameras? Stick a fork in ’em, they’re done.

  34. 4409 says:

    The Cameras are a straight out fraud…

    I would say sue the cameras companies and the state but they are all one and the same. Same thugs running different schemes.

    The courts are just a big a fraud just different actors.

    The solution is not suing and nor putting it up for fraudulent diebold vote but deny them the very thing that they need to survive and that it cash and crediability.

    They only have one of these elements as we speak and when the other is remoced and it will be, they will disappear, it’s just that simple!

  35. dollar398 says:

    The real issue is the legal precedent that photo radar cameras set. It is replacing a Police Officer with serial processing and a bit of glass.

    Additionally they have nothing to do with public safety, they are only tools for generating revenue. If a law was passed requiring that no profit be generated for any municipality or company from photo radar citations, then you would instantly see them disappear.

    People can argue all they want to about the current situation with the cameras, but what everyone needs to think about is the precedent that this sets

    (personally I have not received a traffic citation in over 8 years)

  36. Jane says:


    wow………did you not study history in school? Give them an inch and they’ll take a mile. Read the Constitution, Bill of Rights, and Declaration of Independence. They were written for the freedoms of future generations. They were written to protect us. There could come a day when you receive a bill for speeding 70 mph in a 45 mph zone and you’d be mad as a hatter because you KNOW you never speed. But according to your argument, the camera is always right. So when it happens and you have a massive speeding ticket attached to your name, don’t complain because as you have been writing here, due process isn’t a viable option. What you are advocating is not American. And continuing to bring up “right to privacy” obviously shows you don’t know your Constitutional rights. There are plenty of other countries who just love the “Big Brother” state you could move to and I’m sure they’d love your camera-wielding expertise…….say like China?

  37. Jane says:

    And also Wackos, you say you have a video camera you carry around to catch people breaking the law……If you begin to arbitrarily thrust it in people’s faces or even following a car because you assume they are breaking the law……… are infringing on other people’s privacy rights. If you were to see police beating on a citizen, you could videotape the “goings on” because it would be proof of another citizen’s rights possibly being infringed on. But to go around video-taping other people anywhere, anytime………you better be careful of what you are doing. It’s no different from audio recording peoples’ phone conversations without them knowing it. You’re riding a THIN line on infringing on Constitutional rights. You are wrong. And to see you continue arguing this fact is foolish on your part. Because what you are advocating could easily turn on you someday. Don’t give up your Constitutional rights so easily.

  38. Max Woody says:

    You all are right on it. Funny thing is I got pulled over by DPS tropper on 101 to remove a license plate blocker plastic cover. It was sold to me for 30.00 by a scottsdale police officer retired in Wickinburg, He says its totally legal. Whats up with that type of intrapment??
    By the way i had heard that a police officer has to be in the van during the recording and photo opps. What a waste of expensivegas and contributing to global warming those vans just sitting there idling all day?
    Also if people would not respond to the mailed ticket it gets dismissed in 90 to 120 days. They do not have enough man power to serve all the people legally. You have to be served in person before the ticket violationcan be enforced in acourt of law.
    So they are really ineffective as long as you dont freak out and run downtown and pay it. Just dont respond to the mailed ticket. that is per an attorney

  39. Max Woody says:

    Dear wacko,
    After reading some of your “head injury “responses you must be reminising about the good ole days in Hilters Germany.

  40. Max Woody says:

    Has anyone looked up the revenue that Scottsdale and FLW intersection generates in 1 month. Its astronomical. The Az Republic did a piece on it a year or so ago. I dont want to misguide you about the figures. I thought it said in the millions of dollars.
    Probably per year not monthly.

  41. Max Woody says:

    Dear Wacko,
    So you would be in total agreement for an eminent domain law to take presidence over your individual rights as a private citizen. Lets just plow right thru your private property to lay down a private corporations for profit fiber optic line to run to those cameras in your neighborhood . And to throw in a easement to dig it up at any time for repair?? Yes that is a fiction example but where do you stop your attitude before that starts to happen??

  42. Rdg7359 says:

    Guess what. The cameras are not activated unless you are speeding or running a red light, i.e. breaking the law and putting other innocent motorists at risk. Where is the invasion of privacy here?

    I am all about privacy and my rights, but on a scale of true importance in life…..this is the wrong fight.

  43. 4409 says:

    Rdg7359 you are wrong. It has been proven that tickets were issued on faulty equipment. This means you could NOT be speeding and the camera would be activated.

    The equipment is out right crap and not reliable in an sense. They never have been and never will….it’s a scam run by criminials and it will be stopped!

  44. camerafraud says:

    Rdg, you’re off base. The cameras are constantly monitored. Look at ATS’ own website:

    “American Traffic Solutions, Inc., is headquartered in Scottsdale AZ, along with the company’s “Global Network Operations Center,” which is “linked to all active cameras and data collection devices worldwide”

  45. michael hall says:

    Its a brave new world in the land of the brave who cower at sound of an arabic name, or spot a person who maybe. What fear runs rampant in the hearts of the brave who spy on themselves, invade other lands to feed an addiction,as their nation of superman logo morphs into a fascist empire bent on global domination like it some infantile game of risk as the ‘Great Game’ continues. Hark! Listen,brave and free american, Listen for the footsteps of islamic hannibal outside the gates of america.
    Troll and spy,view and whitewash it all for the sake of securityas you trade in your freedoms and get neither, as you now live in a cage and those who have the lock, key and cage are above reproach,above the law as they sign statements breaking the law,breaking their oath to uphold the law, the supreme law of the land: THE CONSTITUTION,remember that piece of paper? If you did you would do your duty,which is your right and overthow such tyanny…..If you are a christian you would rise in the pulprit and shout out: “Thou shall not Kill! Love thy enemy! Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword. And the greatest law of all; Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”

  46. Max Woody says:

    Our founding father would be having a fit about all this surveillance.
    The patriots that fought the Redcoats were actually insurgents. Comming in from all over the 13 colonies. Hence the Boston Tea party.
    Pehaps their should be a camera tea party…..Those on the street coner protesting really are patriots. Its too bad the ones with their head in the sand dont see it comming.
    If you think occupying for oil is a problem just wait until the freah clean water wars start in 20 to 30 years…..The corporations see this comming hence all the bottled wayer products…who knows what they will put in there now or in the future……

  47. Joe says:

    Has anyone ever given any thought to what it would be like to take a more active stance on this, as in civil disobedience? Throw some bags over the cameras at 4 in the morning or something?

  48. Jerry Vierra says:

    Joe that’s exactly what these criminals’ want the people to do. If it happens, then they will fire up the spin machine and portray all the people in a bad light. The only way to fight this is to present the facts of the hard evidence to the people. We the People are their worst fear. Contrary to their over inflated arrogant attitudes, we, together, are the powerful force for change. It beings by replacing the deceptive thoughts they have implanted in the people’s minds with the reality of the situation. They will use this website to argue their frivolous positions. Stay the course. Use truth and honesty to counter their lies and deception. I know from experience it works. I am now awaiting a ruling in my favor from the Ninth Circuit. I used truth, they used lies, I won! Remember this, Criminals are Morons!

  49. Brian B says:

    Max Woody is astounded at the amount of revenue is coming in from photo enforcement. Why is this a problem? This is a cash cow that speeders voluntarily feed by their bonehead driving habits.

    Why is it that you folks are so unwilling to stick to the posted speed limit? If you’d simply do a little math you’d realize that the time saved by speeding is neglible.

    Also, there has been a net decrease in both the number and severity of accidents where the cameras have been installed – so what’s the big deal?
    If you folks are indeed so concerned about “safety” what’s the big deal?

  50. rdg7359 says:

    Let’s hear it for higher state, city and sales taxes. After all how do you propose to come up with the money needed to pay for more police? I know, higher property taxes!

    Great Idea!

  51. rdg7359 says:

    If you are SO worried about your right to privacy, drive where there are no cameras or drive the speed limit!

    Problem Solved!

    MAX WOODY: It is against the law to obscure, block the view of a license plate

  52. AZ Gunslinger says:

    Speed limits are tools for idiots who cannot decide for themselves, just how fast they feel like driving that day. I have ALWAYS loked at speed limits as an average rule of thumb, nothing more. I determine just how fast I feel like driving, given variables, like the weather, my vehicles mechanical shape, etc. For me, it’s always at least 10 mph OVER the posted speed recommendation.

    Remember to flash your brake lights to warn cars behind you, of radar ahead, and to flash your headlights at oncoming vehicles to warn of radar ahead in their direction of travel.

  53. Max Woody says:

    to rdg7359 and Brian B.

    I never do speed faster than the traffic as I like to save gas. But I do feel you have to go at the speed of the other traffic hence 5-10 mph over like everyone else states here . I agree you dont really save any time. Thats not the point here. Were not asking people to speed we are asking the city to take the cameras down for our constitutional reasons and rights which go way beyond the speeding issue.
    The license plates with cover are visable just not to the illegal cameras.
    The retired police officer is also selling a clear paint spay that works also and the plates remain visable as well. So should that clear spay be illegal too??
    Thomas jefferson would be laughing in your face at your viewpoints. Its always about the bottom line of money and not doing the right thing consitutionally speaking.

  54. Max Woody says:

    Just met a young Man released from military duty in Iraq…looking for an electrical engineering job. He went to ATS and was all excited about the evesdropping capability of the “mothership” location that ATS has in Utah. All cameras linked up thruout all the communities that have them in the USA. Thats a really bad negative energy set up. Nothing good can come from such a thing.
    Reminds me of the “worlds first” corporation “New India Tea Corporation” that the King of England and some of the aristorcrats had set up purely for their personal profit.
    Thats what started the revolution here. The Tea got dumped in the harbor and then the King attempted to hold the “insurgents” from the colonies financally responsibe to the tune of 1 millon dollars. If they did not pay then he would have the royal navy shut down the Boston Harbor for all future trade. Talk about “I me Mine” tactics and missguided negative egos that in the end really cost the New India Corporation.
    History seems to always repeat itself. I just like to sit back and watch these big corpoations trip up and hang themselves in their own A@# hole.
    Keep on patriots remember the U.S. constitution and all it represents.

  55. K.S. says:

    I wanted to address something WACKOS said earlier: “the people who are complaining about the cameras are the very people speeding”. FALSE! I attend the protest Friday and for the record, i have never had a speeding ticket, from a police officer OR a camera.

  56. Max Woody says:

    Just met a young Man released from military duty in Iraq…looking for an electrical engineering job. He went to ATS and was all excited about the evesdropping capability of the “mothership” location that ATS has in Utah. All cameras linked up thruout all the communities that have them in the USA. Thats a really bad negative energy set up. Nothing good can come from such a thing.
    Reminds me of the “worlds first” corporation “New India Tea Corporation” that the King of England and some of the aristorcrats had set up purely for their personal profit.
    Thats what started the revolution here. The Tea got dumped in the harbor and then the King attempted to hold the “insurgents” from the colonies financally responsibe to the tune of 1 millon dollars. If they did not pay then he would have the royal navy shut down the Boston Harbor for all future trade. Talk about “I me Mine” tactics and missguided negative egos that in the end really cost the New India Corporation.
    History seems to always repeat itself. I just like to sit back and watch these big corpoations trip up and hang themselves in their own A@# hole. With the economic times that are presenting themselves now I just love watching the stocks drop on certain corporations as they get caught holding the bag. Its like watching a trainwreck.
    Keep on patriots remember the U.S. constitution and all it represents.

  57. rdg7359 says:

    How are we going to pay for the extra police officers to replace these “Big Brother” cameras? Remember we need enough officers to replce a device that works 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, never calls in sick, doesn’t require overtime pay.

    I am waiting for you to enlighten me. Whats it going to be…higher proerty taxes? Higher state income taxes? Higher sales taxes?

  58. Max Woody says:

    To rdg7359
    Your still missing the point it always about the money with you guys.. There is something beyond the bottom line its called doing the right thing.
    This is about constitutional issues. Its way bigger than money. Its our freedom its what millions have died for if you refer to your history books. It dosent hurt to read a little bit. In fact why dont you start reading the constitution for starters.
    Even if we were to break it down to your elementary 101 level of point of view the response would be:
    At least that extra officer doesnt infringe on my constitutional rights regardless of overtime or sick leave. And he is a real human being that can make a mistake and possibly be able to admit it under oath unlike the cameras…..

  59. rdg7359 says:

    To Max.

    You still haven’t or refuse to tell me how you propose to pay for all these new police officers.
    It is all about money, it has always been about money and it will always be about money.
    By the way, it is your right to contest any photo radar citation you may get. The same way you can contest a citation from a real live police officer. However, it is harder to prove your case when they have a real time video of you breaking the law.

  60. Max Woody says:

    To: rdg7359
    Im glad that you agree that the real time video shows how ATS is breaking our constitutional rights in real time.
    The ticket is totally invalid and worthless to the city/state under the laws of this state and my rights. Only unless I am “personally served” by an officer of the court. So how much more money is that actually costing the city and the court system to exeucute the proper summons and paper work to chase down the people that do not respond because of wrong address or out of town with no knowledge, that a real police officer gets done when you sign the ticket indicating that you are aware of the tickets existence when it is issued in real time. Its really costing the city more to legally inforce such tickets. Its just a bogus system that the ATS salesmen have duped the cities into participating in this infringements of constitutional rights. They rely on scare tactics fear mongoring and the dumbing down of the soccer moms and such that dont care to read whats really going on here. They just watch Faux News.
    How many tickets actually go unpaid because of the ineffeciancy of the contitutionally wrong big brother camera god system. The judges know this and hopefully will stay unbiased. They have to dismiss these tickets after 90 to 120 days without prejuduce.

  61. rdg7359 says:


    How is the ATS “breaking our constitutional rights”?

    The ATS is only triggered when someone is A) either speeding or B) running a red light. Both of which are breaking the law, perhaps you’ve heard of it.

    If it does have a malfunction, it can be easily detected as there would be many innocent drivers wrongfully ticketed and malfunctions can easliy be detected through traffic history, pattern history, etc.

    I do not like the cameras anymore than the next guy. If people would abide by the 10 mph rule and next exceed the speed limit we wouldn’t need them. If you haven’t noticed, the 101 is like driving on the Autobahn at times. If you act like children and disregard everyone else’s safety on the road, fine, you desrve to be treated like children, Cameras.

  62. Max Woody says:

    Its the forth and fifth amendments just for starters and there are many others.
    The forth states no warrants issued without oath and affirmation. A machine cannot give an oath as the truth.
    Thr fifth states “without due process”……these camera tickets are just mailed out.
    With no due process at all. With No live person indicating that a violation has occured. only a machine that has been proven to be inaccurrate some of the time.

  63. Max Woody says:

    :The fifth goes on to state no seizure of property for public use without compensation, well if someone stupidly shows up to the courts after a ticket is mailed. Sets a date then does not show a warrant is issued. They get pulled over and car is impounded and if they cant afford to get it out of the pound its sold at public auction and the cash used for city or public use.
    All because a corporation hoodwinked an unsuspecting city council or who ever to allow the system to be set up. The public trusting the corporation that all is legal.
    From the get go in this scnerio the constitutinal rights were violated.
    If these guy were legit they would put up signs around all cameras and within the summons mailed out as well as billboards thruout the city stating” YOU DO NOT HAVE TO RESPOND TO THE TICKET MAILED TO YOU. IT IS AGAINST YOUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS UNDER DUE PROCESS OF LAW” as a puplic service announcement

  64. Max Woody says:

    The forth goes on to protect the wrong people being summoned.
    Lets say your nanny is driving your car going to store or taking kids to school.
    The sun visor is down, Or someones teenager is wearing a George Bush mask or other legitimate scarey halloween costume. the real owner is still issued a summons to appear.
    Being falsely accussed and having to defend themselves against false charges.
    The forth Particularly zeros in on describing the persons to be seized. well all the cameras are going on is the regestered license plate owner. Not the real person driving. Hence a real live policeman changes that scenerio.

  65. Scott says:

    rdg7459…You sound like a communist..

  66. Awesome subject. Liked it a lot although i do not agree much with your opinion. I will return some other time to expand my own opinion cause right now I am in a bit of a tight schedule.

    Stop by my latest blog post at:

  67. Anonymous says:

    Just stumbled upon this wonderful article.This is extremely exciting.I’ve bookmarked it and will come back routinely.Hope to see more such articles.file_links\xrumer_resource\km_sig.txt,1,L]

  68. Its the forth and fifth amendments just for starters and there are many others.

  69. which redirect the viewer by your affiliate link so they can instantly buy! This could increase your conversion price!

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: