Accidents Double Since Redflex Cams Installed

postitCollisions at four intersections in Peoria, Arizona have doubled since the introduction of Redflex’s deadly red light cameras, the Arizona Republic reports in an article titled: “Peoria officials question the value of red-light cameras.”

According to numbers from the Police Department, collisions at the four intersections have doubled since a private company finished installing red light cameras in June 2008.

During the 2007 fiscal year, from July 1 to June 30, there were 36 collisions at the intersections. In fiscal 2008, there were 73.

As yet another example of the Republic’s editorial bias (the paper is unabashedly pro-photo radar and has hired former automated ticketing insiders), the entire article fails to mention even once the vendor responsible for making Peoria a more dangerous place to drive: Redflex Traffic Systems.

The same Republic writer, Dustin Gardiner, mentioned Redflex over thirteen times in a puff piece last week when he helped promote Redflex’s development of so-called “solar-powered” speed cameras.

42 Responses to Accidents Double Since Redflex Cams Installed

  1. RPr says:

    accidents double.

    Reason enough to vote the scameras out.

  2. Steve says:

    yep not surprised

    cameras are BS and just out to make money

  3. Dr Jett says:

    I learned that the Arizona Republic can’t be trusted to tell the truth when they wouldn’t publish any of my letters to the editor because explaining the truth about photo radar was considered too controversial according to their editors who I called on the telephone in Jan 2009. I didn’t bother to renew my subscription because the newspaper was only willing to publish a one-sided view. You have to wonder how much Redfux is paying the Az Republic to publish only their viewpoint and hire their previous employees.

    • Ernest T.Bass says:

      TRUTH !! DID YOU JUST MENTION THAT YOU TELL THE TRUTH ABOUT PHOTO RADAR? this site has no concept of the truth…. never have since they have been up…. and neither do you… i am sure your “letters” were nothing more than rants from an anti government tin hat wearing clown… they would end up in my trash also… you dont deserve to be published… then have probably been rejected most of you life… losing is nothing new to you.. and neither is lieing !!

      • Dr Jett says:

        Ernest T. Bass,
        You have already established that you are nothing more than a disgruntled ‘take it in the ass punk’ who gets upset because Redfux or ATS doesn’t pay you more for spouting your anti-freedom dialogue on this site. Go back under your bridge Troll.

      • Pink says:

        Bitter, party for one, your table is ready.

  4. mghtyms04 says:

    Well after doing some research from what I can tell the red light scameras in Peoria are ILLEGAL and are in direct violation the the city code. In 1991 the city passed a law banning photo/traffic speed monitoring devices or devices capable on monitoring speed and capturing it on a photograph. Now from what I have read from Redfux’s own side and their own presentations on fixed red light scameras, they are consistently monitoring the speed of all alleged red light violations.
    I would put the link here so you could see for yourself, but I have no clue as how to do that. You can email me and I will give you the link

  5. photoradarscam says:

    Peoria officials don’t want to believe it, just like the Tempe officials can’t believe that fatalities increased 43% after they installed cameras.

    There’s more to the story. They didn’t publish the injuries and fatality count.

    • mghtyms04 says:

      From what I can tell there was only one fatality at a scamera intersection in 2008. This was at 83rd ave and Thunderbird. Additionally, in 2007 there was not a single fatality at any of the intersections that Peoria decided to but the scameras. Oh by the way, there were no red light scameras in Peoria in 2007. From what I know the fatality was a woman. This begs the question, would I give up my freedoms if it meant saving the lives of women and children?

      • Nuf-Ced says:

        Interesting, I was never under the impression driving was a right, always thought it was a privilege. So I would beg to know what freedoms are given up if it isn’t a right. However, voting is…..

      • photoradarscam says:

        We have lost the freedom to travel this city without being tracked and monitored. What’s next? Applying for a permit to drive somewhere? They can use the cameras to see if every driver has a permit to be on the road.

  6. who says:

    Ya’ll say you hate the people who published that article, because they are pro-camera, but you don’t hesitate to publish one of their articles that don’t agree with the camera’s…
    To bad you also cut and pasted the parts of the article you only wanted others here to see. If you keep reading the actual non CF ‘edited’ article, it talks about how the increased accident rate could also be attributed to heavy construction at those same intersections.

    • metelhed says:

      So where was the full disclosure in the articles the Arizona Republic published a few months ago extolling the virtues of the cameras and how they were solely responsible for the drop in accidents (not less traffic due to the economy and higher gasoline prices)? I don’t agree with only mentioning the favorable points of an article to bolster one’s opinion, but it goes both ways.

    • Nuf-Ced says:

      I agree Who.

      Does anyone remember when John Hook reported in Scottsdale that collisions increased where speed cameras were deployed, this was back in 1999 or 2000? Well he forgot to also report the population increase was the cause for the increase of the collisions. Everything is reported in a bias manner, look at CNN vs Fox News. In any case a 400% increase in rear enders is better then one death from a t-bone. So to me it sounds like people are starting to stop on red for once if you read the release.

      • photoradarscam says:

        You are a fool if you don’t think a rear-end collision is dangerous and can be fatal.

        • Nuf-Ced says:

          Hmm funny, I didn’t say that, but if you want to take being t-boned over being rear ended by all means go for it.

          Also the increase in rear end collisions could be solved implementing tailgating cameras before the intersections. Now that would be a money maker.

    • metelhed says:

      I’m guessing you didn’t bother to read the source material. It should be bothersome to anyone that not only do the Peoria numbers show increased collisions at all of the intersections, most of the report is focused on financials, not safety. This is a great tool for those of us who see through the B.S. and know exactly what the true purpose of these cameras really is. The “construction” excuse is a smokescreen designed for spin, that’s all. It’s almost laughable that Redflex, DPS, and other cronies wouldn’t admit other factors into their “studies” when the numbers were slanted in their favor, but will now use other factors to spin the numbers when they’re not favorable.

  7. The Arizona Repugnant

  8. Stacey says:

    Yeah, thank God for the construction, the accident rate would have been twice as much.

    • photoradarscam says:

      Exactly. Since when do accidents double in construction zones? If accidents are doubling in construction zones, then you’re not doing it right. And the construction didn’t last all year long…

  9. photoradarscam says:

    Here’s an article with way more data:

    You can now see clearly how the repugnant whitewashed the news as much as possible.

    • Bill W. says:

      Hmm…… What a reliable source of information…

      • photoradarscam says:

        Are you suggesting that the City of Peoria staff report that the article linked to is fake? Looks legit to me, and everything matches up to the AZ Republic.

        What exactly are you saying isn’t true or legit?

  10. I get the same problems when contacting Newsday to get published in their paper. My views are always censored, so I have to print my side of the story on NYC CameraFRAUD. It seems Newsday loves the red-light and speed cameras but doesn’t wish to print any dissenting views in their newspaper from the public. Lots of people who use their online web site have compained about not wanting red-light cameras. Newsday is a Long Island, NY newspaper publication.

  11. photoradarscam says:

    Here’s another beauty. A man’s license is suspended 8 years after a photo ticket he never received.

    Yeah, just don’t speed and you have nothing to worry about… except that letter from the DMV saying your license is suspended for no reason. Oh, and you’ll have to spend several days of your time and hundreds of dollars straightening it out. Thank you very much, pull through.

    Isn’t it amazing how no one ever seems to know anything about why these “glitches” occur? The general public needs to be FAR more concerned about these problems that no one ever seems to be able to explain.

    • who says:

      I just love how over on the meetup page, there’s a discussion of avoiding the process server.
      Ya’ll are having to spend 120 days, constantly looking over your shoulders, installing wireless camera’s and peepholes in your houses, avoiding answering the door and forcing your families to live on lockdown… just to avoid a process server. Easing off the gas pedel could have prevented all of that paranoid living. I’d hate to be jumping at every sound and having to constantly peek out the window just to see who’s around my house. I’d feel extra bad about putting the family through that…

      • Ernest T. Bass says:

        who !! you forgot to mention having their children lie for them….

        let me tell you a little about the meetup discussion pages… if you start posting anything critical, such as here, you will be removed from posting there.. THAT IS WHERE THEY ALL GET TOGETHER, HOLD HANDS AND TALK ABOUT ALL THE BAD THINGS THE GOVERNMENT IS DOING TO THEM… I THINK THEY ALSO SING KUM BA YA ON A NIGHTLY BASIS…. the only person that posts there is named David, he took on the city of pv about a light that was short and won…. i think he is a lawyer or he has a legal background, maybe a paralegal… he did things the right way….
        oh crap the door bell just rang…i better hide !!!

      • Dr Jett says:

        Are you really that lame to think that it is complicated to avoid a process server trying to serve you for some minor issue ticket from a scamera attempting to rob you and your family. I would recommend burying your head back in the sand or go and hide under your favorite bridge you troll.

        • who says:

          Oh ya… from what your buddies on the meetup page wrote, sound like 4 freaking months of a real good time living like a prisoner in your house and subjecting your family to it!

          • Dr Jett says:

            You just proved how lame you really are. Do you think a process server only has one item to serve. I hope you and Ernest T. are comfortable hanging out under your favorite bridge, but I would look over my shoulder to make sure that Ernest T. doesn’t take advantage of you. I would recommend sleeping on your back. Just think of we could have a new movie; Trollback Mountain.

        • Ernest T.Bass says:

          your are correct jett clown..for YOU it is probably easy to shutr yourself off from the world for 4 months…. as it is clear you dont have a life anyway !!!

          • Dr Jett says:

            Ernest T. Have you got a crystal ball? you obviously wouldn’t know what it was like to have a life, but you are right the Devil will be waiting for you and the rest of the scum that work for Redfux and ATS.

  12. RPr says:

    Costa Mesa Red Light Cameras Increased Accidents

  13. Ernest T. Bass says:

    if the republic is SO BIASED !! why did they run a story that could be considered negative about the cameras?

    you clowns are scared of your own shadows!!!

    • Camera Hater says:

      And, with respect, you belong in North Korea.
      I’d suggest you change your pseudonym.

      Banastre Tarleton would suit!

      • Ernest T.Bass says:

        and with zero respect for you…. hell seems to be a good place for you to break all the laws you want to !!
        see you there !!

        • Ernest Hater says:

          So, you just admitted that you too, are going to hell. I am sure the devil is going to love giving it to you in the rear.

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: