Ex Pinal County TaliVans in Redflex’s Parking Lot


Since UberSheriff Paul Babeu scrapped Redflex’s moneymaking scheme in his county, Redflex’s TaliVans sit in a lonely part of the parking lot, all dressed up but nowhere to go.

Former Pinal Photo Taxation Unit #1

I imagine they are waiting for their triumphant return. You know, when Redflex greases the right palms to get their program reinstated.

Former Pinal Photo Taxation Unit #2

But I don’t think Sheriff Paul is gonna let that happen! In the meantime, I’ll just enjoy watching Redflex having to mothball more of their equipment.

87 Responses to Ex Pinal County TaliVans in Redflex’s Parking Lot

  1. Redflex Corporate says:

    Ha! The real loser is Pinal County: Those vans are so old we couldn’t donate them to Goodwill!

    And to think the judges in PC bought those tickets hook, line, and sinker. We could have used bananas for radar guns and they still would have accepted our word as gold.

    Suckers!

  2. RPr says:

    down with the talivans! LMAO

  3. Glyph says:

    They may have bought the tickets hook, line, and sinker, but not before you bought their vote. Redflex hasn’t made a deal above the table in years. In fact, I think I might drive by William Bell’s place this weekend and check out his shiny new ride!

  4. artie says:

    soon their parking lot will be full of talivans

  5. geez says:

    Funny how sheriff Bubu says the state conveniently forgot to mention that people were driving less, and that’s why accidents have been down (even though gas dropped like a rock?)
    Funny how he says the accident rate in Pinal went up 16% while the camera’s were in operation, then ‘like the state…’ HE conveniently forgets to mention that at the same time the camera’s were in operation, Pinal county ranked third in the NATION for growth.
    Hm….funny.
    From the eastvalley tribune
    “From 2000 to 2007 – Pinal County saw an increase of 66.5 percent in population.”

    and ONLY a 16% increase in accidents. Not bad.

    Now that he has his new goonies out, lets see what stats he can twist around here in a couple months.

  6. RPr says:

    Sheriff Babeu also showed fatal accidents increased from 12 to 24 doubling since they installed cameras

  7. Glyph says:

    But the funniest thing Sheriff Paul said was “Redflex, get the hell out!”

    I’m still enjoying that one!

  8. Redflex Corporate says:

    The 79, 297, and 60 all have parts running though Pinal County. We’ll just deploy our DPS vans there instead.

    Notice I said “OUR” vans. We run the show.

  9. jack b says:

    didn’t someone have to trespass to get these pics? that was pretty stupid.

  10. Glyph says:

    There weren’t any No Trespassing signs posted in the parking lot that services other businesses in the same building as Redflex, so NO jack b, I wasn’t trespassing, and NO jack b, I’m not stupid.

    Next question please…

  11. geez says:

    RPr,
    yes fatals only doubled in a county where population rose 66%.
    And did he happen to mention how many of those fatals were at redlight intersections and city streets? Probably not.

    btw Glyph, you are pretty stupid to just admit it.

  12. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    glyph doesnt worry about the perception that he is stupid… cant fight what comes natural….

    so glyph you are the bad boy behind the camera? i knew you would hide behind something….

    have you come out of the closet? did you tell your parents?

  13. Glyph says:

    Well hello Geez and Law, thanks for joining the party! Did you JUST NOW figure out that I’m the main lens responsible for most of the pictures here on CameraFRAUD and on the flickr photostream (see above)? Wow, most folks who’ve been paying attention know my name, address, phone number, and what I do for a living. But all that info has somehow escaped you!

    YES, I have been in Redflex’s parking lot, many times. YES, I have walked right up to Redflex’s front window, peered inside, and taken pictures. YES, I photograph cops who stake out our protests. YES, I have walked right up to Redflex’s cameras, stationary and mobile, and photographed them. Need I go on?

    The best part is that it’s ALL LEGAL!! I haven’t done anything wrong as I expose Redflex to the rest of the world. if they start putting up No Trespassing signs, I’ll go shopping for a better distance lens. They won’t escape me…

  14. RC says:

    You forgot to mention you also videotaped a camera being silly stringed and had it posted on your youtube profile.

    Although that coviently disappeared after it was said that they were going to go after people vandalizing the equipment.

  15. Joe says:

    Two words for you Redflex:

    Magnetic Signs

  16. I'm Back says:

    I agree with Joe. It’s a tough economy out there. Do you really want to try to re-sell your marked tali-vans?

    I drove a sponsorship vehicle for about a year and it was a real pain in the arse to strip it down so that none of the markings were on it nefore we sold it. It’s kind of a PR nightmare to have some lunatic commit a crime in a car/truck/suv with your name all over it.

    I guess RedflexDPS already know about that though:

    http://www.dui.com/dui-library/arizona/speed-camera-van-driver-busted-for-arizona-dui

  17. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    glyph…. why do i care to know about who the photographer is in this operation? i dont care to know your name, address, phone # or latest boyfriend… and is rc correct… is this true? you videotaped the silly string incident? so you have stepped up from rebel with a cause to vandal? nice!!!
    does this site advocate vandalism? REALLY GUYS .. I THOUGHT YOU WERE BETTER THAN THIS!!!

    glyph.. martyrs want the video left up and they want the no trespassing sign up .. so they can be arrested for the cause…. you?…. are a coward!!! and cowards can not be martyrs!!!! its not in them… like you cant be a secret service agent if you are not willing to take the bullet!!!

  18. dgpjr777 says:

    The Pro-Radar person out there that has the info about Sheriff Boo Boo associating with the convicted felon during his speech at the Capital please post it again. Also send it to the Board of Supervisors at Pinal County and the Gov.

  19. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    that was probably his cousin from his mothers 3rd marriage which was to her nephew… they had a kid and named him boo boo II… thats the second or jr. for all you that dont know!!!.. so it is ok to associate with a know felon as long as he is your relative by marriage.. twice removed but biological!!!

    yee haaaaaaaww!!!

  20. Dan G says:

    The trolls are back! Notice they NEVER dispute how the cameras infringe on rights, and now they’ve taken to name calling (coward, mothers 3rd marriage, stupid, closet, etc). They can’t support the cameras on substance, so they resort to assumptions and name-calling. You’ve been busted LAB, enjoy your redflex paycheck while you can.

  21. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    cause they are not infringing on any rights.. that is your opinion…. and i have made mine clear…. get a clue.. or get lost… and i took the name calling and now i am firing back…. dont like it .. then get your boys to stop… i didnt start it!!! i will stop when they have stopped !!!

  22. Sick of Government says:

    If you say they aren’t infringing on any rights then neither is the one who stands out front taking pictures of their employees.

  23. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    i already said i am not saying it cant be done… i am saying ..leaves the people in the vans alone.. get out of their way… let them do their job… this is not the kind of media attention you want…. oh hell.. i am not going to write it again… even malphesant does not agree with attacking their workers//// it will not get you support!!!!

  24. Sick of Government says:

    There’s a difference between attacking & observing. Taking pictures is not even close to attacking. Just like the scameras on the freeway and city streets are not attacking, they are observing.. 24/7. And I’m sure if the person taking the picture was in their way and preventing them from doing their job, DPS or PPD would step in and make some arrests. I have not heard of that occurring, have you?

  25. Glyph says:

    Ok… I’m awake now. Let’s see, where to begin?

    @RC: I posted the Silly String video. That doesn’t mean I took the video. Several local network affiliates aired the video on their evening news broadcasts. Does that make them suspects? No, of course not. I took the video down because my children could be seen on that YouTube account, plain and simple. And has DPS, the FBI, or anyone else come to kick my door down? Nope, for three reasons. One, they can’t prove that I made the video. Two, if I did, they have nothing to charge me with. The vandalism and obstructing justice/government charges simply don’t apply here (please look them up before challenging me on that one). And three, DPS’ masters at Redflex simply told them not to act. They made a bunch of noise about assigning a special investigater, but that’s about all we’ve heard about it.

    @Law: If you do decide you want to know my info, simply ask the user who posted after you, dgpjr777. He knows my address and phone number, but has declined my invitations to come over and say certain things to my face. I’m sure if you ask nicely, he’ll share my information with you. If he declines (as he so often does), just ask me, and I’ll give you my information, so you can walk right up to my front door, knock, and wait for me to answer so you can make another gay joke, or another reference to my family.

    As for bothering people while they’re doing their jobs, if they’re out in public, even if they’re inside a vehicle, they have no reasonable expectation of privacy, and are fair game for the lens. That was decided on the Supreme Court, and is the cornerstone defense used be the Scamera companies. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, so they can just get used to me photographing them, just as they photograph us.

    Next!

  26. geez says:

    “As for bothering people while they’re doing their jobs, if they’re out in public, even if they’re inside a vehicle, they have no reasonable expectation of privacy, and are fair game for the lens.”

    You said it Glyph. So why are you all whining about privacy? Your out there taking pics trying to catch someone doing something wrong, where the photocameras are out there taking pictures of people doing wrong. So… You said it

    And it’s true, you can photograph anything you want, knock your socks off. So no one should be crying when it happens to them. But ya’ll are.
    And you can’t deny that receiving a license to drive is a privileged not a right, which like you said, gives you no right to privacy when your operating a vehicle.

  27. I'm Back says:

    GOOD NEWS!!!

    Governor Jan Brewer just said the words we have all been waiting to hear from our State Gov’t Executive Branch about the Cameras.

    http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2009/02/06/20090206brewer-budget0206-ON.html

    I can’t wait to see the spin on this one. Thanks for playing Redflex/AT$/DP$!!

  28. Glyph says:

    Read my posts, I make NO complaint over privacy concerns (while I fealize that others do). My concerns are about civil liberties and due process.

  29. PhotoRadarScam says:

    Elect Jan Brewer Gov. 2010!

  30. I'm Back says:

    I second! Hear hear!!

  31. jgunn says:

    The camera lovers on azcentral have resorted to calling Jan Brewer a lawbreaking speeder since she opposes photo radar. She’s like a little old lady. She probably drives 10MPH under the speed limit all the time. It’s amazing the camera lovers use the same tired argument over and over that the camera opposition are a bunch of people who want to drive 100MPH through school zones. But I guess when they have so little to argue with on their side, they resort to the same thing over and over like a broken record.

  32. Redflex Corporate says:

    Actually Jgunn, Brewer doesn’t drive anymore.

    Redflex’s police division (DPS) ensures the Chief Execs safety at all times. It’s like the Umbrella Corporation from Resident Evil, except we really exist.

    No fear, we would never let our personal views come between us and ensuring Jan’s safety! After all, we have Australian shareholders to answer to.

  33. geez says:

    Jgunn,
    you consistently resort to lies and false claims, “like a broken record”
    you make your comrades look stupid.

  34. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    glyph…i guess you skipped right over the post where i wrote… i dont care to know who you are, where you live or where you take pictures….

    it will be exploited that old jan “slipped ” into the governorship…. she will not be elected…. when she gets over the culture shock of her new job and gets done bitch slapping janet.. she will realize that there is a budget to meet…. the $$ will change her mind… the ultimate kick in the pants is should she be elected… it will not be too long after that she changes her mind and extends the contract… remember boys just cause she doesnt like it doesnt mean she can make it go away all by herself… and do you really think these companies are going to pay all that money to install the equiptment just to see it yanked in 2 years? no… i am sure there us a buy out clause…. and since the state is in the defecit… there will be no money to buy out the contract… of course this is all speculation on my part…

  35. No One says:

    So, King Hypocrite–

    How is it that you suddenly don’t care who took the pictures, when you are the one who specifically asked Glyph if he was the one behind the camera?

    And as to the speculation on your part, your speculation is wrong. Read the contract, as posted here on 12/5, and as indicated several times in the last month or two. There is no buyout clause.

    If you’re going to spend inordinate amounts of time here (as you apparently are) I would suggest you educate yourself on the subject at hand, which you have singularly failed to do thus far. Your personal opinions, of which you have many, are of little value without the knowledge to back them up and speak at least halfway intelligently.

  36. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    a few days ago i was assuming that whoever took the photos also wrote the captions that were written wiht them…. thats why i wanted to know who took them… i think that is very clear… go back and read it again….

    i have been here 7-10 days…. i have not and not planning to read every single bit of information related to this issue…. i dont have any grass roots movement thing going on… nor do i have any positions to defend… i just have opinions …. thats it…. you see this way i dont become like you guys…. so consumed that you are willing to mislead and twist things rather than have the truth come out!!!!

  37. Glyph says:

    On the articles I’ve written, I’ve posted the photos and captions. Prior to that I shared my photos with CameraFRAUD.com for stories about events I’ve photographed.

    Click on the flickr link above, those are ALL my photos and captions. Hopr this clears things up for you.

  38. dgpjr777 says:

    Glyph, I see you have not changed with your childish attitude. No I Have no reason to come over to your house. You may think your Johnny Bad ass but grow the fuck up. I do not have your address and if you have a dispute with someone else here, you give it to them.

  39. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    my hats off to you for your devotion to your cause… with that said… i still dont care where you live or am i interested to meet you…. and i still think that its about the law not the $$

    enjoy your protest today!!! keep working to get it on the ballot…

  40. geez says:

    Glyph,
    So you took down the video because you didn’t want your children to be involved?
    So why did some people make it out into a big scandle, like some government agency censored it etc?
    Regardless of the topics here, good lookin out for your kids, and apart from this place, I like your other stuff.

  41. Glyph says:

    Thank you Geez.

    I have no idea why it looked like a scandal, but I took the Silly String video down once I saw it was getting something like 1500 hits per day. I just wan’t used to that level of celebrity!

  42. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    now i have never seen this video but did you film it live?

    if so..how fortunate for you… being anti camera .. that you were in the right place at the right time to be able to catch that.. was there audio also?

  43. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    now i have never seen this video but did you film it live? you know as it was unfolding?

    if so..how fortunate for you… being anti camera .. that you were in the right place at the right time to be able to catch that.. was there audio also?

  44. glyphhunter says:

    Law, it makes sense to fight Fire with Fire!

    Was there audio? Well, yes… sort of. The video was set to Men at Work’s Land Down Under, an old 80’s tune by an Australian band, about Australia. It might be a play on Redflex being from Australia =)

  45. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    the question was direct and simple… did you record it live? if you did then either you are very lucky or you were part of the vandalism…

  46. Glyph says:

    No vandalism, read the statute

    There is no law against vandalism as you describe it. There is however a statute for criminal damage, but the events portrayed in the video do not meet any of the criteria one must meet before they can be accused of committing criminal damage. So, assuming I did shoot the video and/or do the terrible deeds in the video, I still haven’t violated any laws.

  47. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    i will argue that there is probably a prosecuter out there that would disagree that what was done to the cameras was not criminal damage… why will you not admit it… you either participated by shooting the video.. or you were just happening by and got the chance to film it… the answer is obvious.. i have no clue as to whether you could be charged…and the way you are trying to distance yourself from it makes me believe you are not so sure yourself… and i cant say that i blame you..why take a chance… that would mean getting a lawyer… probably a little lost time at work… being a martyr just isnt all its cracked up to be…

  48. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    ok glyph… i took a look at all your pictures… nice pictures of the cop yelling at the kid … yea officers get a little uptight when they are making an arrest and someone trys to get in the way.. can you blame them? for all the cops knew that guy has a gun!!!
    from those pictures i think it is clear … you do not have the overwhelming support of all law enforcement…

  49. L.A.B. Post Counter says:

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 1:57 am

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 9:59 am

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 10:00 am

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 1:13 pm

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 1:37 pm

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 3:20 pm

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 3:22 pm

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 4:01 pm

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 7:38 pm

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 7:44 pm

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 7:59 pm

    Law A. Bidingcitizen Says:
    February 7, 2009 at 8:11 pm

    Do you get paid overtime to work on Saturdays?

  50. Glyph says:

    It doesn’t matter what a prosecuter thinks or doesn’t think, the law is clear.

  51. Glyph says:

    Further, posting a video doesn’t mean that I took the video. The video could’ve been given to me, and I could’ve posted it. AT WORST, that could be construed as a copyright violation, assuming the ‘victim’ wanted to pursue the matter with me.

    I respect police officers and deal with them frequently in my work environment. Also with sheriff’s deputies and correctional officers. I had jury duty last November, and sided with the prosecution, who happened to have sided with the police.

    I’m a tax paying, voting, red blooded American, and I’m a vet. I love this country and still adhere to my oath to defend it against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Especially domestic.

  52. Glyph says:

    @dgpjr777 (and Law, you might want to pay atention to this too, for the next time you decide to bring my family into this)

    dgpjr777, you’ve forgotten already? It’s still up there, but here’s a little reminder. Still waiting for you to come over and call me a moron.

  53. dgpjr777 says:

    Glyph, I have no idea what you are talking about in reference to bringing your family into what ?
    Secondly I have no interest to come over to your house or even see you. As I said before grow up !

  54. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    glyph…. what the hell you bringing me into it for?
    listen…. hitting the bottle and posting is not the way to go… you write things that you may not have written before the bottle..

    so… did you tape it or not?

  55. No One says:

    thought you didn’t care…?

  56. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    i dont care where he lives, his phone number or any other personal information… i want to know if he just happened upon the scene of the crime or was he the designated videographer.. is that a word?

    i am sure of the answer … but it is funny watching him side step the question… i mean if he really was the video person and he really thinks that he did nothing wrong in the eyes of the law… then whats the big deal….

  57. Glyph says:

    @dgpjr777: The sentence in parenthesis was directed at Law, because he wants to know if I’ve ‘come out’ to my parents yet. The rest was directed at you because you chose to call me moron.

    This whole time, I’ve just disagreed with you two and answered your questions. I’ve never insulted you or called you names, or most of all said something about your fammily. Have a little class like Geez, a mature adult who one can disagree with, yet still be civil, and recognizes the importance of family.

    Law, I did not ‘happen’ upon the scene, I was not the ‘designated videographer.’ I’m not sidestepping anything, I’m answering your questions in the same way you answer people’s questions to you, with ambiguities and changed subjects. I hope it frustrates you.

  58. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    whatever…. you are the one trying to keep this thing from getting to law enforcement … but if you are as innocent as you say.. then just say it…. i thought a martyr would want to be arrested.. you know.. get the message out…take one for the cause!!!

    guess you are not as tough when you are not drinking!!! liquid courage will get you in trouble boy!!!

  59. dgpjr777 says:

    Glyph you are right and I agree with you. The Moron statement was directed not at you personally but I meant it as some of things things that were said, Statement wise.
    I do disagree with alot of the things that are posted on here by some people. sometimes it gets out of hand by some. I really disagree with how the Sheriff and Bill Conley can associate with a convicted felon and work for Law Enforcement. That part bothers me alot.
    As far as your opinion and mine I will debate you and likewise but there will be no name calling because it is in poor taste.

  60. Glyph says:

    The Moron statement was directed not at you personally but I meant it as some of things things that were said…

    I must’ve misread the part where you wrote
    Glyph you are a Moron, sorry.

  61. dgpjr777 says:

    Glyph I guess you got me on that and I was wrong since I do not know you. I apologize for that statement,but that is all. My Feelings about some of the issues on this site remain the same. Some of the People continue to post lies about what is going on with the cameras. The issue where that one van was parked, it was not in the Gore and you know that, but yet you made a comment to side with the person that posted it. There is so much that is posted by people that have no clue about law and true facts about how the cameras are helping. A very good friend of mine works for DPS and he has said it has improved the way people drive around town. Hell I have become a better driver since the cameras have been around.
    Also just as I posted before, look at what Brewer wants to do now, raise taxes and bring back property tax. I would rather see money go to the state for people that continue to break the law and speed around town than to tax the entire state. Just my two cents.

  62. Glyph says:

    And when did I say the vehicle was in the Gore Point?

  63. No One says:

    dpgjr-

    the deficit next year is projected to be 3 billion. That’s a lot of speeders!

  64. dgpjr777 says:

    I guess when you made this comment :
    Glyph Says:

    January 30, 2009 at 6:18 pm
    If you or I are caught crossing the Gore Point as it’s called, it’s 9 points on our driver’s license.

    Ironically, the penalty is so high because years ago a DPS officer was killed by a driver crossing the Gore Point. Now, Redflex Tali-Vans can park there with impunity.

  65. Glyph says:

    I thought you might have been talking about that…

    If you were referring to the picture in the article, it looks to me like the van is parked in the center median, but I don’t know for sure because I didn’t take the pic.

    I just said that if you cross the Gore Point, when trying to merge with freeway traffic for example, it’s a big deal, both in points on your license, and safety issues (and how those safety issue relate to cops). It really bothers me when I see other drivers do it.

  66. dgpjr777 says:

    Weel I agree on that, it bothers me also. Everyday I see some person in a hurry passing people and going through the Gore area and then flooring it ,speeding down the road. I guess thats why I like the camera idea,we need to do something about our roads. Arizona roads were getting out of hand with the speeds people are driving. Something has to slow them down.

  67. I'm Back says:

    I say that Redfux should put a camera in the Gore Area. That way if someone tries to drive through it to cut through traffic, they will just collide with the stationary device.

    That outta slow em down right dgp and Law A? RIGHT???!!!

  68. dgpjr777 says:

    No One, well would it not be better to have money still go towards the deficit than to raise taxes ? Let me ask you, if the Gov would of never said anything about where the money was going would there be a dispute against the cameras ?

  69. RPr says:

    cut spending

  70. Joe says:

    dgpjr777:

    Why Arizona bases their revenue model almost exclusively on sales tax revenue, is something that always puzzles me. Considering the state’s significant budget deficit, this solution is barely a molecule of clotting agent in the wound. This “solution” is far nore about Napolitano throwing a little sugar towards lobbyist friends of hers under the guise of a budget fix. Look for Napolitano to throw even more sugar at these friends of hers in her new federal job. I’d imagine we’ll be seeing ANPR technology popping up on all kinds of roads not far from the US border. Well hidden and very innocuous.

  71. Glyph says:

    @Joe…

    That’s already happened I’m sorry to say. They didn’t even put any effort into hiding the cameras, y’know because DHS doesn’t answer to anyone.

  72. RC says:

    Glyph a couple questions.

    If in your opinion, you would have nothing to fear if you took the video, yes or no did you take it?

    Also you said you removed it from your youtube account because of the volume and you had pictures of your children on there. If that was the reason I respect it, but why in the hell would you then be arrogant enough to then post your home address on a public website?

  73. I'm Back says:

    It’s amusing to see how interested the camera supporters are in details like “who took the video,” “is that your spokesperson,” “is so-and-so the site admin,” but then they claim to have no involvement with the industry itself or Redflex/AT$/DP$.

  74. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    rc- get ready to be dizzy.. he is going to spin that question like a top!!! round and round it goes .. when it stops knowone knows!!!

    even better … he took and involved his family in criminal activity!!! great…. can you say CPS !!!??

    glyph… next time get a sitter!!!

  75. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    im back…. this was all glyphs doing…. the curiosity comes from his deception !!! he was proud of what he did …. but not proud enought to be a martyr… it also reveals the level of his common sense to post his info….

  76. No One says:

    DPGJR- yes, that would still be a problem.

    I believe that fines from tickets/etc are just fine to go into the coffers of law enforcement– but as soon as there is a profit- and we’re talking tens of millions in this case- it creates a conflict of interest. Regardless of the method of enforcement, I do not believe that the government should ever turn a profit off of lawbreakers for just that reason.

    Should there be an unexpected surplus, there are plenty of worthy and underfunded causes out there to which it could be donated.

  77. No One says:

    whoops, realized I forgot to include the tax issue. Yes, I have said it multiple times I would verymuch prefer a tax increase to the cameras. It’s honest, it doesn’t have the privacy issues, and doesn’t reduce our law enforcement officers to collection agents.

  78. RC says:

    Why is it always assumed that people who post positives about the camera are employees?

    You need to get out of your bubble and realize that not everybody thinks like you.

  79. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    no one…. the fine for operating a vehicle without insurance is just under 1000.00 are you saying that there is no profit in that? and dui’s…. there is a hell of a lot of profit in those fines….

  80. dgpjr777 says:

    No One, Where do you think the money goes from fines that the courts take in everyday ?
    Also what is the privacy issue everyone has an issue with the cameras? You have civilians working in DMV,Police records, Dispatchers,court clerks, Accident Investigators and so on that have more access to your information than the Radar companies.

  81. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    dgpjr- now you did it…. he is going to have to really dig in the crap bin to pull out an answer to those 2 questions!!!

  82. Glyph says:

    Law, you need to keep my family out of this. That Is a courtesy I’ve extended to you since day one, and it’s time you extended that same courtesy to me. I’ve not called you any names, I’ve acknowledged the complexities of the work you do, and said nothing about your family. You on the other hand insist that I drink before I post (though you say I’m not a drunk), say I involve my kids in criminal activities, and ask if I’ve ‘come out of the closet’ to my parents yet. You do nothing to stimulate debate, you simply make accusations and insult people.

    For the record, I took the video down because of the attention it was getting, and there were videos of my kids on that YouTube account as well. My kids had nothing to do with the video that you’re so worked up about (but have never seen). And I believe I already stated that I didn’t film the video in question, so I’m not sure how to make it any clearer for you. I’m sure you have some witty reply, to say I’m spinning this, but you’re wasting your breath. I’m out there (outdoors, away from the keyboard) fighting for what I believe in.

    Are you?

  83. No One says:

    DPGJR- When I used the term “profit” I was not necessarily speaking of an individual transaction. I was talking about the end dollar amount at the end of the month, or the fiscal year or what have you. IE the 50 or 90 million (depends on the source you read) dollars this year going toward the budget hole. If this money is available able to be diverted to the budget, I would expect that this is after DPS’ expenses were taken care of. Money left over after expenses is profit.

    As to the privacy issues, again I will say that if I were to get pulled over by a policeman and receive a ticket, I would assumably have been breaking the law. Therefore there is a reason for my information to be recorded, unlike the cameras, which just record everyone without a stated reason. Further, when a policeman pulls me over, it may be documented I was in that specific spot at that specific time– unlike the cameras, which record every time a person passes them.

    Then, once the information form my ticket is entered into the system, of course there are people who see it– but there are a lot less people who’d see it than if there was a whole other company involved. Those people are also government employees, who I would like to think I can trust at least a little more than a corporation from halfway around the world. There are also some very specific laws which the government has to work around when evaluating how to use that data, and what they may or may not do with it. Those laws are also quite enforceable, because they are both state and federal laws. I work in an industry which does business internationally, and I can tell you firsthand, when you are in this country and you have a problem with a company in another, even when there is an international treaty in place (which to my knowledge there is none on identity and personal data issues, though I have not looked specifically) these treaties tend to be extremely difficult to enforce, as neither the state nor the feds have direct jurisdiction, making enforcement of international treaties is extremely difficult, even if they do exist. So if my data were to be misused, I could very easily have no recourse whatsoever.

    To make a long story short, I am not a fan of identity theft, and when there is no reason for my data to have been collected to begin with, muchless retained, I take issue with it happening anyway and being shuttled off to a non-governmental agency.

  84. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    oh glyph..calm yourself down now…. your shorts are all bunched up… maybe you should go fix them? i will wait……………………………………………………………………………………………ok… i have yet to see the post where you “say” that it was not you doing the recording… it may have been before i blessed this site with my presence… yes thats probably it… couldnt you have written that oh say…. 15 posts earlier? H E L L O !!
    having a drink while posting does not mean you are a drunk… however you seem to be sensitive to this issue… maybe you do have a problem… fear not… if you dont attend the meetings then you are not an alcoholic…
    i would have left your kids out of it… but you opened the door !!! now you have shut it… hopefully i am not still in there… speaking of kid though… have you taught your kids that its ok to speed? and that its not fair that the cameras are there to slow you down… ? do they think its only wrong if they get caught? god help you if thats the message they are getting… time will tell!!!

  85. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    “those people are governmet employees, who I like to think I can trust a little more than a corporation from halfway around the world”… .thats what no one wrote…. so how does this go? isnt DPS a government ( state really, but i get it ) agency? and are you people not taking shots with your posted articles at dps? all the time? and dont tell me there is a difference between the officers and the guys at the top cause you have not made that distinction.. just as you lump all redflex employees from the ceo to the van driver as “bad ” and criminal!!! cause the word fraud in most cases and certainly here is not associated with good things… there is not usually any good fraud… correct?

  86. No One says:

    I take the occasional shot at DPS because it allows itself to be associated with such scum. On the whole, I believe they are trustworthy and respectable, except when they are actively engaged in a conflict of interest such as the one in which they are currently embroiled.

    And as to my view of the individuals versus the higher-up,s, with DPS I can’t say it’s ever specifically come up. However, for the record, if you would care to go back a few posts to the “hamster dance” thread, you will see that I do indeed make a clear differentiation between your low-level guy and the higher-ups, and I do not and never have called the drivers criminals.

    Please at least make a minimal effort to check your sources, otherwise outright falsehoods such as those above are getting mighty near a lie.

  87. Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

    i stand by what i wrote and scoff at your pitifull reply sending me on errands like i am going to just cause you suggested it….

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

%d bloggers like this: