Stealing From Constituents May Have Political Cost

photoradarRaking in hundreds of thousands of dollars from photo radar and dangerous red light scams (during an unprecedented economic recession) “may” have political consequences says Captain Obvious, who is apparently working for the mainstream media:

What’s unclear is the political costs to be paid by city officials when residents vote in November on whether to keep the devices. People on both sides of the issue are saying that public sentiment against the cameras could translate into votes against candidates who are seen as supporting them.

In Heath, where cameras generated $554,729 in fees in their first two months of operation, Mayor Richard Waugh said he understands why the anti-camera crowd would want to make him the poster boy for photo enforcement.

(From Columbus Dispatch)


16 Responses to Stealing From Constituents May Have Political Cost

  1. Will Kay says:

    “People on both sides of the issue are saying that public sentiment against the cameras could translate into votes against candidates who are seen as supporting them.” That’s damn right, and I won’t tolerate any politicians who say they stand against the cameras and then drag their feet on the issue either!

    • Ernest T. Bass says:

      will !!! calm down cowboy… the fact is you have been tolerating it… i have some news for you… the cameras are still up !!! dont tell anybody though !!

      with the signature count at 65,000 to 70,000 as of a week are far from the goal and less than a year away !!! time is running out….reminds me of a Simon and garfunkle song… slip sliding away !!!!

      • jgunn says:

        You know you want to sign those forms. You know from the ATS and Redflex polls that 99.9% of US citizens support photo radar. What better way to prove that the public luvs the cams than to put it to a vote. You wouldn’t be a bit scared that this might actually get put to a vote, would you? Anyway, until then, my 99$ Iphone and a free app owns the cameras silly. Don’t need to give the finger to the cameras, I am already virtually doing so with my own off the shelf technology.

        • who says:

          and all those gadgets you’ve bragged about buying to defeat photo radar? Well guess what.. they want camera’s to stick around so they can stay in business! Thanks JGUNN for supporting a pro-camera industry!

      • Will Kay says:

        There are more signatures than that. I don’t know where you got your figures from, but I do know we are well on our way to getting more than enough, and still have the State Fair in front of us along with many more events to collect signatures. Don’t you worry your fedora wearing head ETB, we will come through for the citizens of Arizona!

        • Dan says:

          Right on Will Kay! While I work full time, I WILL be volunteering for the state fair. I am glad to support our democratic process as well as having a part (albeit small) in getting these cameras put to a vote!

  2. Matt says:

    AMEN brother.

  3. You bet. The RLC’s in Peoria caused accidents to DOUBLE and the council elected to extend the PILOT program another year! This action shows a callous disregard for the safety of the city and a desire for revenue at the expense of the blood of its citizens and visitors.

  4. RPr says:

    UK Government Admits Traffic Accident Figures Miscounted
    For the past several years, the UK Department for Transport (DfT) has heralded the drop in the number of serious traffic accidents as evidence of the success of its speed camera policies. For the first time, the agency admitted last Thursday that injury numbers have dropped because its statistical method is incomplete. Although DfT reported 230,905 injury accidents took place in 2008, the agency now believes the true number of accidents is actually three times greater.

    “Our best current estimate, derived from survey data with cross-checking against other data sources, is that the total number of road casualties in Great Britain each year, including those not reported to police, is within the range 680 thousand to 920 thousand with a central estimate of 800 thousand,” Matthew Tranter with DfT’s Road Safety Research and Statistics wrote.


  5. Matt says:

    Not shocking, SADLY. Not shocking AT ALL.

  6. Steve says:

    I will vote against anybody backing photo radar. we need to get a list of who approved what so when election time comes around we can get them out

  7. Mike says:

    I believe just such a list is posted in the files section of the message board. And I’m with you, I say we make up signs and post them for each one in their districts saying “Joe Smith voted for photo radar”

  8. mghtyms04 says:

    so i would like to know who would vote for me when i run for govoner of this state. i hate the cameras and would work hard to oust the politians that approved these things. just trying to weigh my odds if terry goodard runs.

  9. RPr says:

    When in doubt Vote them out!

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: