1000 by 1/17?


Press Conference Slideshow / Gallery

Today, CameraFRAUD filed a citizen’s ballot initiative to outlaw photo enforcement within the State of Arizona.

Will YOU help us reach 1000 members by Saturday, January 17th?

–824 Members as of Monday, Jan 12 2009 @ 6:00 PM


Join today to:

  • Find locations to sign the initiative.
  • Get advance notice for upcoming events.
  • Receive free support from the community regarding photo “notices” you may have received, and what to do.
  • Find out how to start distributing the ballot measure to collect signatures.
  • Connect with other CameraFRAUD members.

The Cameras are Coming Down!

84 Responses to 1000 by 1/17?

  1. camerafraud says:


  2. Scott says:

    HEAR! HEAR!!!

  3. Steven Schloeder says:

    I fully support your work.

    I would suggest you publish the names of every legislator who voted in support of this measure — let’s get them kicked out of office while we’re at it!!!!

  4. Steve Bridge says:

    Like the idea, but not sure about this site. The fine print for the terms and conditions are just about as obfuscated as the debacle behind the photo-radar cameras.
    1. I can’t tell if I am on a real or fake website. Normally, the real site is “http;//www.XXXX.com”. This one is “https://camerafraud.wordpress.com”. Is this the real thing or a pirated site?
    2. I want to find out – are you or aren’t you going to sell or provide my email address two 3rd parties?

    Or, is the camerafraud organizers just paying to set up on “WordPress.com”?

  5. camerafraud says:

    Hi Steve,

    WordPress is a blog publishing platform. CameraFRAUD.com is the same as cameraFRAUD.wordpress.com.

    As for selling your email address, our member system is handled by Meetup, a well-known 3rd party organizing platform.

  6. KC says:

    I am in favor of this initiative. Safe driving involves maintaining a speed that is close to the PREVAILING rate of speed of surrounding traffic. If that prevailing rate is 12 MPH over the speed limit or 12 MPH under the speed limit (such as during heavy traffic or inclement weather) so be it. Vehicles that stray too far from the prevailing rate cause rear-end collisions. (In this realm, slow-moving vehicles are quite dangerous.)

    A motorist should keep their eyes on the road (which includes vehicles around you). Constantly peering down at your speedometer (to stay below a certain speed) or looking out for speed cameras is an unreasonable distraction.

  7. Rich Miller says:

    I think the cameras are a great idea.. They work to help slow people down.. But yes i agree the state is taking advantage of the money issue.. So i think if we issue a warning for the first offense and a 100 dollar fine for the second and 50 increase for every ticket after that- i have much more to this idea- please e-mail me.. (email removed by admin – spam prevention) @yahoo.com- p.s. We already paid money to put them up- so why not use them verse take them down-

  8. RPr says:

    rich miller

    all ideas are welcome here, although they will be harshly debated LOL

    chucky lighten up or you will be sent to the corner lol

  9. 440 9 says:

    I think they should take the cameras down and then install them in our living rooms. This way if we get out of line while watching American Idol or Dancing with the stars they can just send us a ticket!

  10. Justin Hayward says:

    I will sign up in a heartbeat. This camera garbage will lead to 1984. The Movie I am talking about. We best put a stop to big brother NOW ! The media is sold out. You see them interview the idiots bobbing there heads yes its great, yet nobody talked to me about it. Did you know overseas agencies are making the profits on the cameras besides the state !!! Screw the cameras, or just become the USSA….!!!

  11. No One says:

    Rich Miller–

    First, (as far as I am aware) the state did not pay anything for the cameras and does not “own” them. They were graciously provided by Redflex, “free of charge”- they just collect a large percentage of the revenues gained and retain ownership of the cameras.

    Second, the issue (for me personally at least) has less to do with the money grab than it does the fact that because the state doesn’t own the cameras, all our personal data goes off to Redflex for processing–and I have yet to see anything resembling a privacy statement or an indication of what limitations, if any, they may have on the use of his data. They will get our registration information (including name, address, plate number, vehicle make model and color) our address, our photo (with facial recognition software), — and will most likely get our driving record and may get our criminal record as well. And all of this without our permission and without there needing to even be any law broken.

    We are in the Information Age… you can’t do anything of a financial nature without agreeing to pages of privacy notices, disclosure information, and waivers- and there is a reason for that! I know more people who have issues with identity theft or credit card fraud than I do who have been injured or killed in a car accident. Physical safety is not the only type of safety out there, and our nonpublic information deserves the same level of care. Yet Redflex can harvest all this information, keep it on file for years (without a clear-cut definition of their security protocols), data mine it and make it available to undisclosed parties over the internet or in an Access database–all without anyone’s permission and potentially with no law having been broken–AND make you pay for it? How many people cut a check, and then have their checking account information recorded, too?

    I don’t care how much safer it supposedly can make us, or what the enforcement level is– even if it worked exactly as promised and made us all physically safe from the Boogeyman that is speeders (which it does not) I am not comfortable with my information being shuttled off to a 3rd party with NO visible privacy restrictions on its use, No specific information on information security protocols, and NO known enforcement methods in the event of misuse. This is especially true when that third party is a foreign owned corporation with a troublesome history of disrespect for the law and individual’s rights!

    Sorry, but a sliding scale enforcement idea or whatever it is you may be proposing does not address these concerns or the others I have– so as much as I hate to discount an idea without exploring it fully, I don’t expect you’ll have many takers on your idea.

  12. Cameras Shameras says:

    The cameras need to go. I don’t even care about the fine part because you can simply throw them away and not answer your door for strangers. It’s the principle.

    It’s all this whole principle that big brother knows what it is best for you and needs to protect you from yourself that pisses me off. The public safety argument is just the BS stupid people buy into. It is just a way to grift more money from the public to divert to wasteful spending (line pockets) and to start acclimating people to the idea of being monitored.

    Just look at the UK, now that is sad, and that is were it is going.

    If you really feel you need robots to babysit you and your fellow citizens than maybe you should consider moving elsewhere where you feel safe, or start taking chill pills.

    This whole camera thing is about as silly as seatbelt laws. I always wear my seatbelt, but as an adult, if I choose not wear my seatbelt knowing the obvious risk for an increase for injury that is my problem. It’s like needing better lables on twinkies or smokes to know they are bad for you.

    The idea the cameras reduce speeders is downright stupid. My office is near the cameras and you can see what traffic does. They slow down when they come up on, and then those who would be speeding anyways gun it once they pass them. The real downfall is when I am driving and a group of cars all the sudden realize they are there at the last moment, don’t know what speed they are going (often within the legal limit) and jam on the brakes as a first reaction.

    Go look the stats for Arizona freeway accidents. The vast majority of the accidents not attributed to going over 10 MPH over the limit because they weren’t at the time.

    For those that are agreeing with the cameras you are perpetuating the same classic impotent and downright idiotic logic that is responsible for a lot problems we face when we try to let the government solve simple problems, or only perceived problems (they aren’t real problems)… you create another problem while not even solving the original one.

    I tired of ineffectual governing and this is just another example. If they wanted to slow down speeders they would just put a single officer every 5 miles, be it parked or pacing just for speeders. The revenues in fines they would right each day would pay for their salaries many times over, lead to arrests of serious crimes, wanted felons and the public would naturally slow down because you would know there was always a REAL chance of getting caught for speeding.

    But, that just doesn’t make sense to them when that money is chump change compared to the money they get from letting a foreign company snap our pictures with a robot.

    Think about that too… across the country all those Redflex cameras are siphoning US dollars right out of our economy which we need so badly and into Australia. Even if it small potatoes in the scheme of things, we need every dollar we can get stay in OUR economy. Lovely.

  13. Cameras Shameras says:

    PS- sorry, for the spelling errors. I hit post before I proofed.

  14. Bob says:

    Cameras shameras: The reason for the seat belt law is that many times the tax payer has to pick up the tab for your injuries after you get into a major accident. Also, my insurance company may have to pay for your injuries that you sustained in an accident that I caused. Definitely more to it than you being “responsible for yourself” as far as the seatbelt laws go.

    Also, there are other scenarios where someone might pay for your injuries. For instance, if I’m drunk and driving and I hit you and kill you, I may now face manslaughter/murder charges. Did I do something stupid/illegal? Yes. Would you have lived if you were wearing a seatbelt? (let’s assume yes). So, had you been wearing your seat belt that would change my criminal responsibility.

  15. Thunderlump says:

    Cameras need to go, where do I sign up!

  16. Roger Schwanke says:

    The camera’s need to go. This is just another method that the Government is stripping you of your rights and to bleed your pocket book. Big Brother is watching.

    Welcome to USSA. United Soviet States of America.

  17. Josh Taylor says:

    The Camera’s are a wonderful idea and you all need to find something better to do with your time. There are no violation of rights with the cameras, just a evolution of how the laws are enforced. It is very simple – Drive the speed limit and you can forget that the camera’s are even there. People who don’t grasp this should not have a driver’s license.

  18. Rich says:

    The places they get you for speeding is when the speed limit changes from 65 MPH to 55 MPH and the camera triggers at 11 MPH. Good Luck!

    What about a boycott of all big ticket items in Pima County like cars? I don’t think the dealerships would like to hear that one, and complain to the PCBS. Plus the business where these cameras go next to will be hurt. Who wants to take a chance going to that business when you know a red light camera or radar camera is right there.

    This is the first step to Nanny State wake up!!!

  19. Cameras Shameras says:

    I wear my seat belt… so no worries. Based on your comment, seat belt laws are not for public safety, but a veiled law aimed at solving a fiduciary problem? Wow, thank you for illustrating the strong correlation between seat belt laws and cameras.

    Josh, maybe you need to start using your time to be more concerned with the bigger picture. Your oversimplification of the issue merely shows me you are simply a low information respondent with basically no knowledge of the implications of the camera apparatus beyond the tickets. My concern is not based on theoretical outcomes, but on foreshadowing that is available to anyone by merely looking at the facts, particularly those from Europe where they been evolving much longer.

    As I said, I don’t care about the fake ticket. They can easily be thrown in the trash by anyone. I don’t care that I won’t get a ticket because I don’t speed. What I do care about is the apparatuses being put in place systematically monitor law abiding citizens such as myself.

    If it seems so innocuous to you perhaps you wouldn’t mind posting your personal info here so we can discreetly stalk you and watch your every move if we like, or would that be creepy?

    Unfortunately for yourself and us, you are to naive to realize that system that is slowly taking hold will be abused – for political, business, personal and criminal reasons. It already has in countries that has given us a preview of what is to come.

    Read the New Times much? Joey boy will be in hog heaven once he gets his hands on this data.

  20. Brent says:


    Your statement is sadly ignorant.. Stating that this quasi-government movement which is barreling us toward a police-state, isn’t violating rights is not correct.

    Its been said many times on this site, but I’ll say it again: “Those who give up their liberties in the promise of security deserve neither”.

    Please see past the ground level issue here- this isn’t about speeding anymore..

  21. Joe says:

    No One said:

    “First, (as far as I am aware) the state did not pay anything for the cameras and does not “own” them. They were graciously provided by Redflex, “free of charge”- they just collect a large percentage of the revenues gained and retain ownership of the cameras.”

    I have a great idea then. The state should let me open hot-dog stands on various freeways. People will slow down without getting cited, they’ll get fed, and I’ll give the state a cut of my profits.

    Oh wait… Me and every other businessman on the planet would like a sweet deal like that, with direct access to legions of hungry drivers. But the freeways are about moving the masses and not about sweetheart deals for select companies who happen to donate to one’s political campaign (and hire political cronies).

    I’m not attacking you No One. Just venting frustration on the myriad of OTHER things wrong with the camera deal that has been cut.

  22. Joe says:

    Josh Taylor wrote:

    “The Camera’s are a wonderful idea and you all need to find something better to do with your time.”

    Josh, you’ll need to find something to do with YOUR time when we legislate your company out of existence in this state. Spend your money wisely, as rights-violating tax collectors are not in especially high demand here. But they’ll always be an opening for you working at Bank of America’s delinquent accounts call center in Tempe. Instead of catching lawbreakers, you can hunt down credit card deadbeats.

  23. Josh Taylor says:

    Thank you all for your responses and forum for this subject. Your comments are dually noted, however, I am not am employee of any company affiliated with the cameras, nor B of A.
    This subject is very simple and will in-fact lead to lower speeds which in turn makes our roads safer. I am in no fear of anyone watching me as I obey the laws. Plain and simple. To think that the government is the enemy and Obama is a terrorist is ludacris. The BIG Picture as you state I am unaware of is that the de-regulation of our financial system under Bush and his flawed Keynesian economic that he applied has led to the collapse of finaincial industry. Trusting people to do the right thing does NOT work and to assume that asking people not to speed and not tail-gate you on the freeways does not work either. The cameras make people aware they are being watched and are more likely to do the right thing or pay a monetary fine.

  24. Jacki says:

    Count me in. At first I thought the cameras were a good idea for safety purposes. However, they are nothing more than revenue generating traps. Drive down the 51, where the speed limit fluctuates between 55 and 65, and who can know what the real speed is at any given time? If I have to spend so much attention looking for/at speed limit signs, then I’m going to miss alot of what is going on around me in traffic. So this has become anything BUT safe.

    And seriously, what is the reason behind the constant change in speed limit? Well, considering that all the cameras arrive in the 55 mph zone, that can only mean ONE reason….generate revenue. It’s RIDICULOUS.

  25. Joe says:


    I applaud you for choosing a name for the ballott initiative that can not easily be twisted and confused by the (soon-to-come) counter-initiative put together by RedFlex and ATS. That has proven to be the downfall of so many other failed “great ideas”.

    Always make it clear in future filings that this is the “End Photo Radar” proposition.

    Did those “other shmucks” ever file their paperwork?

  26. Joe says:


    Go check out Goerge Orwell’s “1984” from the library. Actually read the book. Forget what you think you know about it, or your 9th grade lit class comprehension of it. READ it. Then come back and talk to us.

    I fear the lax attitudes surrounding “being watched” more than I fear a speeding ticket or personal setback due to a fine imposed. It’s really not about the money for me.

    And Josh, if activism is your game, then why not go help set up the “competitive” ballot initiative your buds will inevitably back? It might pan-out into a nice cushy PR job at Redflex or something. Perhaps even a nice state contracting gig or some political consulting kickbacks.

  27. Scott says:

    Josh Taylor….Some of us are liberals and did vote for Obama, however, I recognize constitutiional intolerance, and these cameras are a perfect example. All of us should vote for this “anti American” petition.

  28. Scott says:

    Errr, I should have said we should all vote FOR this petition…The cameras are “anti American”.

  29. Joe says:

    About the only “democrat” thing (as opposed to Republican) I could ever “possibly” associate ideologically with the cameras is pure revenue generation. But I would never bother as this issue could just as easily be the Bush boys trying to collect information on the undefined “bad guys”.

    This AIN’T a democrat thing and it AIN’T a republican thing. Quit trying to constantly polarize issues relateed to liberty and freedom. That’s and AMERICAN thing.

  30. Jeff Staal says:

    I think the cameras can be used to document criminal activities and catch rouge drivers. here is the irony, the car makers design the cars to go at 140mph and the DPS says its criminal to go 10mph over the speed limit of 65. its definitely a money maker. i suggest set the spped limit to 85 for the cameras to catch the speedsters

  31. john says:

    the cameras are a bad idea to slow down the traffic. i see lot of them panic and hit the brakes causing accidents. i recomment to use them to monitor and regulate traffic but not use as a money maker. DPS is doing a wonderful job to be responsive to traffic needs. they can get creative to educate drivers to slow down or teach driving manners.I suggest anybody speeding over 75, make them go through a special driving class designed to show them the implications of speed driving. show them the horrible accidents scenes, photos. if DPS is interested in our safety, build deterrence in a driver not drive fear into a driver. i was in california last week. i was yelled at by other driver for driving slowly, calling me ‘miss daisy’.

  32. Hugs67 says:

    Hooray! – now we just need the signatures and from what I have read and seen that shouldn’t be a problem – the majority is against the cameras.

    Funny how we as voters have to wait til 2010 to actually vote on it, didn’t take the 3 of the 5 Pima County Board of Supervisors supervisors that long to order 20 more cameras.

  33. Glyph says:

    Today, January 13th, as of about 1:20pm, there are 1043 members on CameraFraud’s Meetup page!

  34. RPr says:

    4409 brings the news to you

  35. RPr says:


    take the poll on the bottom right hand side

    If it makes it on the ballot, will you vote to ban photo radar cameras?
    Poll Results:
    Yes, ban them. 55.43%
    No, keep them. 44.57%
    Total number of votes: 626

  36. Joe says:

    Not one month ago, I was #500, so kudos everyone.

  37. photoradarscam says:

    Be careful guys, this will NOT be a slam dunk. Do not think that victory will be easy. We must make hard to get this initiative passed.

  38. Glyph says:

    Agreed photoradarscam, I think we’re about to get a firsthand look at how motivated these companies are to stay in business here in AZ. They’re prepared to address public dissent on photo enforcement programs, and we’ll be finding out how that translates into Australian.

    Let’s keep our eyes open.

  39. Joe says:

    I think it will pass easier than you think. For starters, it’s worded AND titled well. It will be tough for RedFlex to confuse voters with their (coming) counter-measure. So many ballott initiatives fail due to their hyperbole-related titles. This one is nice and simple: “End Photo Radar”…Nice!

    Remember how the payday loan industry poured TONS of money into swaying opinion and their opponents spent next to nothing? Well voters still figured it out and sent the payday loan people packing (buh-bye!). The proof is in the pudding here. People know when they’re being scammed. I have spoken to VERY few people at work who seem to think the cameras are a good idea, and I work with a nice cross-section of people. We’ll be fine.

  40. Zebra says:

    I hope you are right, Joe.

    There are 2 types of people out there. Those who still think “If you don’t want a ticket, don’t run the red light.” And those who have gotten one of the “trickster tickets,” and started to pay attention.

    We have to educate the first group with a clear and simple message. One that the press can comprehend, and spoonfeed back to them.

    The camera companies and the lackeys they have cultivated in the local government keep adding to the second group.

  41. No One says:

    Josh- think of it this way:

    You can be obeying every last law and be a model citizen. You are not guilty of anything, you are not accused of anything, you are not even technically suspected of anything– and yet without your knowledge or consent, without probable cause or due process and with minimal to no oversight from anyone, your personal data is being actively collected by Redflex. They are building a file on you personally. They will be able to tell where you have been, at what time, and who you’ve been with.

    Meanwhile nobody can seem to state why they need this information, how it will be protected, or what it will (and will not) be used for.

    I ask you, is a perceived reduction in speeds really worth that, and does this scenario not concern you at all?

  42. duece says:

    Why dont you people just obey the traffic laws and do something positive for your community. I have NEVER had any problem with the cameras. Since they started appearing on the highways, I have noticed that people are not blowing by me at 90 MPH any more. They seem to be working.

  43. Josh Taylor says:

    I think we are the majority out here deuce, I agree….

    “No one” I understand your argument and agree to some extent, but traffic cameras are not the enemy and this argument against them is far stray from your privacy argument. The intent and use of the traffic cameras is clear and in my opinion and if they do moitor them and the police are able to locate a few felons here and there and make arrests; I am completely behind them and will sleep well knowing my family is a little safer. We are not talking about cameras in your kitchen or cameras in store dressing rooms here, you are on PUBLIC roads when monitored and the intent is for the good of the public, plain and simple.

    Please come to terms with reality and accept your mistake if they do catch you and stop whinning about secrecy. The cameras keep the city safer and hopefully will lead to less children being beaten with baseball bats in parks or people like Dietman and Hausner to be out there murdering and police not able to catch them. They now have a video of the guy who beat the kids in Laveen just before christmas and the video should help to convict him, IS THIS A PRIVACY ISSUE? I think NOT! Especially if thise were YOUR kids now dead…..Be careful what you people ask for, it could be your son or daughter that goes missing or gets murdered with no cameras out to assist the police!!!!

  44. Zebra says:

    Wow. Traffic cameras can protect us from murderers.

    I might have to rethink this.

  45. Josh Taylor says:

    Good comback, Zebra. Remember it is your group in the posts yesterday who broadened the argument to other issues beyone the traffic cameras. I will now leave you all alone to stroke each other. Just felt like being the advocate fot the good fo the whole. Good luck and if your argument is right I guess the camera will go. I doubt it tho.

  46. Doc says:

    Josh Taylor-I’m 47 years old. I served Honorably in the U.S. Air Force, entrusted with the lives of 2 pilots, & responsible for a jet worth 10’s of Millions of taxpayer dollars. You need to quit stressing the “good of the whole”, as this kind of thinking leads to a totalitarian state, which most thinking Americans DON”T want to be involved in. If you have a valid point to make on this site, please feel free to do so. If not, get th’ hell out! If you’ll take an hour or so & READ the U.S. Constitution & the Bill of Rights, maybe then you’ll get a clue. Then, you might want to read Geroge Orwell’s “1984”. Then after reading these things, you’ll be able to form an intelligent opinion on this topic. – Doc from Prescott

  47. I'm Back says:

    What do you mean by “stroke each other?”

    I’m unfamiliar with that term.

  48. Doc says:

    Joe & All- The “kinder/gentler” alternatives to an outright ban need to either be modified. The proposed law should include the banning of ALL of the ANLP tracking/facial recognition technology, personal information harvesting/compiling, & computerized “streaming”. It should limit use of photo enforcement ONLY on speed 20mph over the posted limit, (which according to Rep Pearce, @ the press conference 01/12/09 is still unconstutional…), & Red light running with standard length yellow light times or flashing yellow lights prior to red. The proposed law should also be meant to include city, county, and state photo enforcement, NOT just state run scameras. If these provisions aren’t written into the proposed legislation, then we need to press on with our initiative to outlaw the bastards, OUTRIGHT & COMPLETELY! Doc from Prescott

  49. PhotoRadarScam says:

    Josh, the privacy concerns are not about having your picture taken while driving. Try to educate yourself. The argument is well presented here: http://PhotoRadarScam.com/privacy.php

  50. Josh Taylor says:

    Doc, if we applied 1940’s literature to all current events, we would be living fearful in the past, right? Dumbass. Yoiur reference literature is not the answer and I am not as un-educated as you seem to reference so readily. So, if I read Mein Kampf, I’ll know exactly how to catch another terrorist like Bin Laden?
    Joe – did you care to look at the posts following your so-called winning article? Your drones are a little non-existent. I see the sheriff of Pinal county decided to back the movement, so we can now rest easy knowing two highways and five dirt roads are camera free, nice win, really! There are enough of us tired of being tail-gated at 75 down the 101 and not scared of cameras to thwart this lame movement if it ever comes to a vote. ok, ok, I will leave you all alone now. and btw stroking each others “egos” was the reference. I suggest a closed forum if you are all scared of the debate.

  51. No One says:

    Josh- I appreciate you’re able to come halfway and at least acknowledge there is indeed be a privacy issue. As for myself, I see yours too. When my wife got a photo radar ticket a couple of years back, my first question to her hen she started ranting and raving was quite simple-“were you speeding?” She didn’t think she could be, given that it was at rush hour, but she the next few days at the same time she drove the same stretch and found that indeed she could speed. She learned to watch herself, we paid the ticket, and (in that specific instance) the system worked.

    But once the cameras started popping up on every corner, I realized that something was out of whack and it was no longer about safety. When I took the time to learn of the various and unsundry laundry list of other problems with both the systems themselves and the companies behind them, I realized they had to be stopped. The current system is like using a sledgehammer to drive a nail– and it’s not even fully deployed yet. Every time I turn around they’re installing a new camera or I hear of some new piece of technology they can add on to perform some other task… first red light cameras… then speed cameras…then automated plate number recognition software….then amber alerts…then looking for felons, terrorists and other nasties with facial recognition software.

    But when you get a corporation in charge of things, that’s what you get. A company wouldn’t be worth its salt if it wasn’t consistently driving to expand and build shareholder value. A technology company especially cannot afford to rest on its laurels, else another company will swoop in and do it better and place them out of business- and as such the company driving this system will expand it as far as humanly possible. As a company, they are always under pressure to expand and develop new markets or new innovations. More capabilities, more functionality, more more more. Meanwhile our government has thus far prettymuch given them everything, lock stock and barrel, and has so far failed to rein in this expansion, muchless hold them substantially accountable for their legal blunders made as they hurriedly rushed out their latest-and-greatest products.

    If you’re not convinced you probably won’t be… but just one more thing, if I may. I remember my science teacher telling me this years ago: if you place a frog in a pot of boiling water, he will jump out. If you place a frog in cool water, and slowly turn on the heat, he will stay there until he boils to death.

  52. I'm Back says:

    What any of that meant, I do not know. Anyone other than Josh the Stroker want to fill me in on what that was all about?

    It’s great to hear that some of our law makers are finally coming around. Time for Redflex to crank up the juice on their cameras before they’re kicked out of town. Everyone watch out, because the bad guys are getting very public warnings that the writing is on the wall for their demise.

  53. me says:

    Talk about fraud….
    Isn’t that Jason Shelton in those pics, the EBAY fraudster?

  54. Zebra says:

    I want to apologize to Josh for responding like a sarcastic flamer. He was actually trying to debate the issue in a reasonable tone.

    It helps to clarify the message by hearing the arguments of people who don’t see the threat. I know it took a little time for me to wake up to what is going on.

  55. Joe says:

    Doc, you’re right. Absolutely. This initiative has been rushed-through. But there is still time to re-collect and perhaps re-craft a better, more comprehensive ballott initiative. I’m not sure if the current language is strong enough to ban the ANLP and other passive-active data collection technologies.

    The emphasis should be two-fold. One, no warrantless data collection and two, no “mechanized” law enforcement.

  56. Doc says:

    1st, to Josh-It appears that YOU, Sir, are the “dumbass”. 1940’s lit.? Living in th’ past ?(a GREAT “Tull” song, by-th’-by) Josh, the U.S. Constitution was written well over 200 yrs ago! Is following it, RESPECTING the way it’s written, living by it’s codes & standards, & supporting it & the MEN who wrote it “living in th’ past”?!?! If so, then I am HONORED to do so. Ref. Orwell’s “1984”; 40’s lit.? You are correct. A shining example of where this “Free Republic” that we all live in is fast going to if vigilant American Citizens do not stand up. You can call the example outdated if you like, (which is what I believe you’re implying…) however, if you are such an educated man, as you claim, you certainly see the corellation between Orwell’s fictional society depicted in the novel, & what (almost to the letter…) the real reason (besides th’ all-mighty dollar…) for the scameras is all about. I DO imply as to your education…If you are as educated as you would have us all believe, NONE of the Americans chiming in on this thread would need to explain it’s purpose to you. It’s NOT that we all abhor SAFETY, or wanna’ drive like maniacs…”dumbass”…it IS that WE ALL ABHOR OUR RIGHTS BEING INFRINGED. If you’d just try to act intelligently, and read the material in the posts here, you would understand. Or you could go to China/Iran/N.Korea/etc.

    No One-I must say, you put your response very well! The analogy of the frog…Perfect! I’ve never been “flashed”, as anyone who rides with me will attest to. I am the perrinnial Grandpa behind the handlebars/wheel. However, the story of your wife…Same story here! My Wife got her photo taken about a year ago in Prescott Valley, which those scameras are run by redflex & the city, (& yes, they DO send out process servers…) & just like you, I said to her,”were ya’ speedin’?” She admitted that she was, which on that stretch of highway,( just like down in th’ valley…) is real easy to do. So, she took traffic school, & that was it. And, YES, she’s slowed down. That don’t change th’ fact that th’ way this technology is bein’ used is outrageous. As I’ve said before, th’ cops & government officials are lyin’ about th’ “safety” issue. I firmly believe that after being involved in th’ political process as long as I have, OUR “SAFETY” is th’ ABSOLUTE LAST thing that most politicians are interested in…PERIOD!(it’s a GREAT SOUNDIN’ excuse, but that’s all it is…) If that were TRULY the real reason for photo enforcement, we still wouldn’t like it, but could tolerate it. But the constabulary(OUR EMPLOYEES) lyin’ to us, even when we KNOW th’ real reasons(Money to make up for THEIR financial irresponsibility, & info harvesting/citizen tracking) for th’ way they abuse th’ technology, that’s just not right! So, thanks for th’ GREAT post! (not that my “thanks” means anything, but there you have it…)

    Joe- I put a lot of thought into how I wrote my OPINION of how the legislation should be written. Thank You for gettin’ it. I believe there’s currently a little over a thousand other Americans/Arizonans that get it as well, & that #’s growin FAST…Thank GOD! I’m in the process of drafting that info into letters for my state representatives, w/copies to Gov. appointee Brewer, & Fed legislators Kyl, McCain, & Kirkpatrick, just to inform them, in case, (just like motorcycle issues…) some brainiac in Washington D.C. tries to make this garbage a federal issue.

    Lastly, I really hope that ATS employees-every DAMNED one of ’em- gets charged with strongarm robbery, & Redflex management gets deported back to th’ land of ‘roos & veggimite, & employees that are Americans get charged with robbery as well. I know that ain’t gonna’ happen…but it’s a really nice thought!

    Remember…F R E E D O M ! ! !-Doc from Prescott

  57. Roscoe says:

    Josh, your comments show amazing ignorance, which I understand because I once shared it. The lights came on for me (OK, no more puns) when a friend of mine received a photo-citation at one of Tucson’s major intersections last spring. She was adamant that she had been in the intersection, and I knew she was being honest, even if she might be inaccurate.

    But I started investigating, and I found that the deceit and outright fraud in this program is rampant. “Safety” is plainly NOT the motivating force. At these intersections with red-light cameras, in particular, the powers that be have deliberately manipulated every circumstance within their control to produce more violations and more revenue, and they’ve made the intersections more hazardous in the process.

    To me, some of the strongest evidence is the fact that the city has set the yellow warning intervals to entrap left-turning drivers. Drivers making left turns 1-2 tenths of a second late have never been a significant cause of accidents, but they constitute about 98% of the cited “violators.” If you watch the videos of these “violations,” you’ll see that nothing remotely hazardous has occurred, but these drivers are getting hit with fines that approach $300 a pop.

    At the intersection where my friend was cited, the speed limit on approach is 40 MPH, and the warning interval calculated by basic traffic engineering formulas should be 3.9 seconds. The actual interval has been set to 2.8 seconds. The city evidently thinks this satisfies the standard of “approximately 3 seconds,” set in the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices. (Arizona law does require compliance with the MUTCD, but the “3 seconds” standard is for 25 MPH and slower approaches, not 40).

    It is well documented that shortening the warning interval increased the number of violations and makes the intersection more hazardous. The city’s traffic engineers know this. The only justification for it is to increase the revenue generated by these photo traps.

  58. Abby says:

    Roscoe – Your arguments are flawed. If your argument is that the cameras are not operating properly; than wouldn’t it be prudent to argue the systems and not their existence? I am all for arguing against the grain, but you have all are being used to picket and lobby for a non-partisan cause. Your members are mad about the tickets and I do believe some of you have good arguments, but just not a just cause to argue to shut them down. “innocent American citizens DO have the right to not be actively surveiled, tracked and monitored” This privacy concern is weak and feeding an ultra-conservative egotistical base that should turn their attention to matters that will make the cause and origin of crime non-existent and stop focusing on who can see them on the freeway.

    Where are the 4 founders of this organization? The new channels seem to give the picketing rallies more attention than they should. I’d like to see them really state the objective of the organization to the public and see how many people are really concerned about “privacy” and not money or being caught doing something wrong.

    Argue they are not working properly, don’t argue that they don’t make people drive safer.

  59. C.A.Gibson says:

    Wish we could get the speed cameras on surface streets next.

    Expressways have become so much easier to drive on !!!

  60. Abby says:

    The 101 in the afternoon is a breeze and I haven’t seen an accident in weeks. Apparently this concept, along with accountability, alludes the radicals here.

  61. No One says:


    It’s not a mere functionality issue on making them work “better” when the only people capable of enforcing any changes to the functions are the very ones who altered the functions in the first place!

    The camera systems, as a piece of equipment, are able to be set to whatever specification desired. So it’s not a hardware issue. The rules are there already– so it’s not an issue of the laws of traffic needing to be changed.

    The issue here is that the people responsible for programming the settings of the cameras have consistently and repeatedly changed them for profit, often in direct conflict with their own preexisting rules. Those same people will be the ones who are tasked with changing the settings to meet any new rules. Given that they cannot comply with their OWN rules to begin with, why should we expect them to comply with any stricter NEW rules that we force upon them?

  62. No One says:

    Oh, and the other thing– the rules of the road (and the various methods used to enforce said rules) are there to keep us safe. When either of these items change significantly, overnight, in a patchy manner, without the general populace being informed– this IS unsafe.

  63. I'm Back says:

    Does anyone care to address how easy it is to get a driver license in AZ?

    Maybe education and not ridiculous fines is a way to create better drivers. What about having to take and pay for a driving test every few years? My license doesn’t expire until 2046. I swear sometimes it’s really scary to read posts of the lazy folks who just want to fine everyone for making a mistake or an alleged mistake.


    I love this website and this cause, but the constant barrage of big brother supporting, slave mentality trolls makes me feel like the Constitution truly is dead. I really think some of you people who come here to argue with us are very very sadly misguided. And I’m glad that only a very slight minority in my sphere feel the same way that you camera supporters do. -RT

  64. SS580 says:

    1. Has anyone else had issues with SPAM increasing since signing up for this site?

    2. Heads-up: The camera on 101 Eastbound at about 35th avenue is flashing at 65… my carpool partner just got a ticket – she keeps her autopilot set at 65. When she got her notice, it said the posted speed in that area is 55 due to construction. There are signs that say construction leading up to the camera, but their are two speed limit signs approachign the camera that say 65. About 1/2 mile past the 35th exit… it says 55.

    Anyone else had problems in that area?

  65. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    why should someone who just cant “drive 65” be able to put my life and my families life at risk? if your objections are anything other than the fact that you may get a ticket if you speed.. then why not take that to task in another way? and to have your sign waving protests ANYWHERE near a road, let alone a freeway overpass, is irresponsible…. you are just inviting an accident ….

    the cameras need to stay because they are in fact saving lives and accidents because people are slowing down….

    it really is a mute point because this is going to go to the ballot anyway…. the politicians are going to see how hot this topic is and will not risk losing votes no matter which side of the fence they are on…. hope you have deep pockets… cause the camera companies do!!!!

  66. Bill Conley says:

    Mr. Law. A. Bidingcitizen,

    Obviously you don’t read our information…
    Photo Radar has NOTHING to do with safety; it’s all about the money. We do advocate full enforcement of all laws as long as they are enforced by a fully certified Police officer not a camera.

    Most of us are strict constitutionalist and believe these camera do nothing more than corrupt government. If you don’t believe us..take the case in Tucson last week; a process server caught red-handed falsifying affidavits of service…100’s of people had their drivers license wrongly suspended.

  67. Doc says:

    Bill Conley-I agree, but MUST point out 1 thing to you. Money, ie;revenue generation IS NOT the only thing about these infernal scameras. It’s about CONTROL! It’s about “Big Brother”! It, in my humble opinion, is about the citizens of Arizona being used as guinea pigs in an experiment by our illustrious former Govenor, currently the Homeland Security Director…do th’ math…
    Remember…F R E E D O M ! ! !-Doc from Prescott

  68. I'm Back says:

    Law A Bidingcitizen = filthy troll

  69. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    gotta love it…. three posts in a row and great examples as to why your cause will end in disappointment for you…. bill says “its not about safety”, then doc is from the “men in black are gonna get me” camp…. then “im back” well…. do you really want him on your team…. he swallowed his tongue cause he didnt know how to respond to me, he will represent you well in the media… the only thing missing was the ” i cant drive “65” guy!!! i am sure he is here somewhere… and of course none of you addressed your at risk protests… here is what is going to happen boys..
    first of all, it is apparent that none of your team is well ..on the same page… you are all in this for different reasons…. i listed the 3 most mentioned…. so when this goes to the ballot and your group has to have a platform which of the above mentioned will it be? the its not about safety wil be shot down with raw statistics that prove that the cameras do indeed saves lives…. the “fraud” theme will also go the way of the toilet because the “for” group will show where the money is going…. i mean, with the deficit, what level headed person wouldnt think that its a good thing to take money from those that want to break the law and put the money to good use… the “men in black” theory… you sure you want to have that as your battle cry? you will all come accross as crack pots…. and the ” we can drive as fast as we want ” chant… that will not sell when the opposition shows the death and destruction from accidents caused by excessive speed…. and where will your funding come from to get the word out? i cant think of any legitiment group that will donate to the cause!!!! oh… maybe “mannys high performance auto parts store” i am sure his $100 will come in handy…

    now … the money for the “keep em” clan is going to come from the camera companies.. and with what they have invested already and the potential to make more.. you know the pockets will be deep… then they will have a paltform that will show facts, as i mentioned above but the most important message they will have will be pulling at peoples heart strings!!! you know, an interview with a family that lost someone… man it will be emotional…. and we can all relate to death..correct? and finally… where are you votes going to come from? the elderly… 55 and up… not a chance! and they are a loyal voting group… yep they were brought up in a time where it was taught that it is your duty to vote… what do you think? maybe 7 of 10 go to the polls? you will get the 18-35 vote…. what do you think the chances they make it to the polls are? i say 4 of 10 if that…. so the vote you will NEED to support you will be the 35-55 …. and you will have the men in that category… but not the women….. and their voting record is not much better than the 18-35…
    so…. do you like your chances now? i didnt think so….

    it is simple people…. the cameras are not there to take away your civil liberties…. they are there to reduce speeds to the legal limit… and if that raises lots of money… great… send it to the schools …. BUT THE IMPORTANT THING THEY ARE DOING IS SAVING LIVES…
    what you people advocate puts my right to life at risk…. you are advocating people breaking the law… the technology is there to reduce speeds .. the cameras need to stay…

    you will lose and lose BIG!!!

  70. I'm Back says:

    Actually Law A., we’ve already refuted your arguments several times over and it’s pretty obvious that you have something to lose monetarily if the cameras go away. So with that being said, you’re actually not worth the effort.

    I didn’t even bother reading your post. Have fun at work tomorrow trying to spin your company’s fraudulent tactics to your two-striker employees who couldn’t qualify for a collections job.


  71. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    MR BILL.. you can always find an example of fraud in govt, and that one instance does not mean that everything associated with the cameras is fraudulent…. i do understand just what you stand for …and i say….. i dont care…. you can not tell me that money is not going to go to the greater good…. i dont believe it…. i want the cameras to stay because i am tired …. I MEAN TIRED … did you hear me… TIRED.. of seeing morons drive down the roads at speeds they can not handle… all the while endangering my life but more importantly the lives of my 3 children and wife… for me thats it…plain and simple… in fact it does not get any more simple for me…. i drove these roads and freeways for the last 5 years for a living… and i saw first hand the number of people who thought that where they needed to go was more important than my life and the lives of others…. if you sir can not understand that… well …. then i feel sorry for you… and hope that you do not have to expreience the loss of a loved one becasue some fool just could not “drive 65″….

    and what do we do when the budget cuts hit the police and dps force…. meaning less of them out there? what then? is your answer going to be…. oh well? atleast we dont have the cameras..

    and finally….. what about your irresponsible protests… i believe that you have the right to protest… and i dont believe that doing it on an overpass where many people will be distracted is the place to have it… in fact near any street is not the place for it…. but then again…. you really dont care about the loss of life… do you?

    i talked to a friend of mine today…. he is an attorney…. he hopes he would never get the oppportunity.. but if it happened he would gladly represent someone who was hurt or killed due to your irresponsibility with regards to where you have your protests… he called it criminal!!!! and i agree…. and i am sure that him and i are not the minority!!

  72. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    just the response i thought i would get with that post… i am surprised it did not come with the first post…. is that all you got? really? are you that simple minded? you cant find something with any substance so now “i have something to gain monetarily? no you are clearly wrong…. that is the same accusation going on all over azcentral… you simple minds cant come up with anything so you resort to that… if i am the director of this site i am clearly embarrassed by your presence…

    i work in the grocery business… i gain nothing from those cameras…

  73. I'm Back says:

    That sounds real believable.

    As an aside, Law A., I’m having all my clients who want to make a little money short the you-know-what out of your stock as soon as that HB 2106 gets passed.

    That’s not NPI so it’s all good!!

    Better get back to stocking the shelves at the “grocery business.”

  74. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    pitifull!!!that is the only thing that comes to mind when i read your posts…. pitifull…. a mind is a terrible thing to waste…. and you are guilty as charged!!!

  75. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    bill- is this your site? are you proud of this clown?

  76. I'm Back says:

    I’m actually not a clown. I’m an honest “Law A Biding” citizen who pays his taxes and doesn’t have anything to hide.

    You on the other hand are obviously hiding something. Please go away now. -RT

  77. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    yes… i am sure you are … and i will not go away….. until i am banned which i am sure will come soon enough if i continue to play into your foolishness…. i am done with you now….

  78. I'm Back says:

    That’s fine if you’re banned. I’m sure you’ve come back with a few different screen names by now. Your tone, diction and vocabulary are very similar to some other departed camera supports and trolls.

    Oops, I may have tipped you off a little too much.

  79. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    i was done with you… but by not defending myself i look guilty….

    i have never posted here before…. i am not a computer expert but isnt that what an ip address is for…. ? i guess i could have multiple computers in my house… but for all i know they would all have the same ip or different ones…. i do not know…. until the other day i have never posted here… not under any screen name….

    i ask the following question for other users…. is this really what happens at this site when an opposing view is presented? if you cant convince me and i cant convice you… then the next thing is to accuse me of first working for the camera companies or some way being compensated by the cameras? and then accusing me of being some body else? is this really how it goes here? or is “im back” not typical of the other members…
    “im back” there really is no need to respond to this post unless of course you have a NEW accusation to throw against me….

  80. I'm Back says:

    Nothing other than you’re pretty much a liar, but I already covered that. I’m not sure why you haven’t gone away yet.

    You might want to check the news on the sight. Things are looking brighter in the Valley of the Sun, but the fight isn’t over yet.

  81. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    its your site… you can post all the bright sun shine news you want and make it all look like its coming together and you guys are world beaters…. but nothing is going to happen… its going to come to a vote!!! and they will stay up until then….

  82. camerafraud says:

    Law A…

    And you are welcome to post up as much pro-camera rhetoric here as you wish.

    Thanks for visiting.

  83. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    thank you!!

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 )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: