Avoiding Photo Enforcement, Tip # 37

In a new series, we’re providing tips and methods to exploit and highlight the weaknesses and problems of photo enforcement. Use at your own risk, your mileage may vary.

Install a trailer hitch which, depending on your bumper and the camera angle, will hide at least one digit of your license plate number.

Install a bike or other equipment carrier.

Or haul a wheelchair or other equipment.

Technically, these may be in violation of ARS 28-2354 which requires, “A person shall maintain each license plate so it is clearly legible.” However, in the cases above it appears to not be very well enforced, as these sightings are quite commonplace.

Regardless, citizens without trailer hitches, bike racks, or wheelchairs on their vehicles should be outraged that they are subject to photo enforcement while others are not.

26 Responses to Avoiding Photo Enforcement, Tip # 37

  1. RPr says:

    sun visors work.

    if you cant identify the driver no ticket.

  2. B says:

    I know that we’re all against photo radar, and most of us have made various levels of sacrifice to see that our proposition gets on the ballot so there can be a fair vote on the issue.

    However, IMO – and it’s just one person’s opinion, and I’m subject to being banned from the site for saying this, or at the very least get some negative feedback from some other posters – but articles like this one are a bad idea from a marketing standpoint. Why? They make this entire organization sound like a bunch of lawbreakers, not law CHANGERS and agents of truth – which is what I consider myself to be and what we should all consider ourselves to be.

    I’m sure that Redflex loves it when Camerafraud posts these types of articles because it makes us look like mini-anarchists that wear misunderstood V for Vendetta masks (which, while powerful symbols, are lost upon those who haven’t seen the movie and/or immediately think of the “monkey mask” guy), not law abiding citizens that want to make Arizona a better place to live (which I know for a fact is true because I’ve met many of you in person and discussed this at length).

    I tell many people, some of which are on the fence on the issue or are for the cameras, to come to camerafraud.com to find out why photo radar is bad for Arizona. “Find out the truth,” I say. If they ever do come here looking for a well thought-out, reasoned argument, and come upon an article like this, the first thing they’re going to think is, “What a bunch of snarky punks that just want to flaunt the law.”

    These articles, when misinterpreted, take the moral high ground out of our hands, and to lose that high ground while trying to do satire or entertain is a fatal mistake.

    This drive must be just as much about marketing our point of view as it is getting the facts out there, and small missteps like this can be disastrous. What if Channel 12 picked this up and put out just one news story that suggests that this group just preaches how to “break the law”? How many thousands of voters will be negatively influenced, undoing hours of talking to petition signers in 1-2 minutes?

    Maybe I’m overreacting, and I’m really sorry if I’ve offended the author of the article or the admins of this web site. I also know that there’s an element of satire or humor in some of the content, and it’s fun to “preach to the choir” for entertainment’s sake.

    However, as deadlines approach and the heat gets turned up, especially when July 1 rolls around and this drive gets certified, the gloves are going to come off from their PR people, and articles like this will be twisted and used against us mercilessly.

    • Stacey says:

      Ah, I give flying fig what Redflex thinks??????????

      Why do you think people aren’t paying their photo radar tickets?

    • I agree somewhat; however, the way that I see it is that it reveals how flimsy photo enforcement is as a law enforcement tool. It really is a joke, and the people need to realize this.

      The people in the pictures are pretty much exempt from photo enforcement, but I am NOT because I don’t have a trailer hitch or any other equipment installed. How fair is that?

      I think it’s important to illustrate to the general public that (by my estimation) half of the people driving by these cameras are ineligible to receive citations because of weaknesses in the whole concept. Because of the reasons mentioned in this article and for other reasons… masks, registered to corporations, out of state, etc.

      This is no different than the early articles which tell people to toss their “notices of violation.”

      • Sure says:

        The people running this photo radar scam are more scheming and diabolical than everyday people imagine.

        This is about BIG time money and the people you know. They work together to scratch each others backs.

        These people are working as a coalition to make as much as money as possible through different venues – not just photo radar.

        This is a multi-million dollar game they are playing.

        The more you dig the worse things you find.

  3. Hellsing says:

    That same code section also contains the following sentence:

    “D. A peace officer shall not stop or issue a citation to a person operating a motor vehicle on a highway in this state for a violation of subsection C of this section unless the peace officer has reasonable cause to believe there is another alleged violation of a motor vehicle law of this state.”

    This likely explains why the issue is “rarely enforced”.

    The phraseology “Must be clearly visible” does not necessarily mean “Must be visible to a scamera 3.048 meters off the ground at a distance of 45.72 meters behind the vehicle.”

  4. Stacey says:

    Lol. Really illuminates how useless photo enforcement is! We need a picture up there of a car with a Canadian license plate, one of a city owned car, one that belongs to a corporation, one that is under a family trust, one of DPS.

  5. Dr Jett says:

    Redfux and ATS attacked the American public with their scameras in 2008 with the sole purpose of using our government against us in the name of $$$$$$$$$$$. Any method that the citizens use to defeat the scamera companies is part of standing up for your rights as a citizen of the USA. ATS & Redfux don’t play by any rules other than the ones they con our legislature into passing by convincing them of the revenue that can be stolen from the citizens in the name of safety. Remember our main goal is to stop racketeering by large corporations and their legislative lackeys against the citizens of the USA. The scamera companies and their RICO partners; DPS, Az Legislature, etc make up new laws to support their scams and continue to blatantly lie to the public. Any defense is a good defense when you are under attack by corporate thieves. I would recommend that we all get a mask like the citizens did at the end of V for Vendetta. May the will of the citizens prevail if this is a free country. Lets put it to a vote.

  6. Dylan R. says:


    Pretty tough to beat these two “suggestions”..

  7. duece says:

    Here is a cheaper idea…dont speed….

    • LoneWolf says:

      Here is the cheapest idea…get a clue….

    • JOKN says:

      here check it out you don’t speed and I’ll hide my face (or)plate and together will put them out of work…

    • Camera Hater says:

      Try to grow a brain, Duece. Not only are the cameras frequently inaccurate, but when the revenue starts to dry up, THEY ARBITRARILY LOWER THE LIMIT. BTW, the speed limits didn’t come out of the burning bush together with the Commandments! They are set by human beings, increasingly without regard to good traffic engineering principles. This is a fraud, with little to do with road safety and everything to do with financially irresponsible State and Local Governments. They’ve suckered you in, Duece!

  8. Steve says:

    I bought and installed one of those plate covers that shows your plate number when looking at it from directly behind, but as you go to the right or left, up or down, the numbers on one side or the other aren’t visible any more. Two weeks later I was on the freeway, driving the speed limit, minding my own business, and was pulled over. The cop gave me a written warning and I removed the cover while he did his paperwork (hoping not to get a fine). The first thing he asked me when he pulled me over was if I had received any photo radar tickets yet. So much for not being able to pull you over unless it was for something else and the plate cover being secondary. All the cop seemed interested in was the reflective plate cover. As he followed me before he pulled me over he could clearly read my plate number. Once the cover was removed, he was satisfied. A few months later I got a photo radar ticket in the mail (separate incident). Four months later after I didn’t respond, the complaint was dismissed. That cop wasted his time and mine.

    • photoradarscam says:

      The only part of the plate visibility law that must be a secondary violation is the part where “ARIZONA” must be visible at the top of the plate.

    • B says:

      “The first thing he asked me when he pulled me over was if I had received any photo radar tickets yet. ”
      He probably wanted to know if it really worked so he could get one of his own…

  9. Steve D says:

    I have the same thing on my car

    never got a ticket for it, ive been pulled over on the street and told i cant have it, i told him i would rather just pay the fine, he laughed and told me he hates the cameras and let me go. Thumbs up to you MR cool cop!

    • Malfeasant says:

      sounds like the one who “busted” me for putting post-its on the mobile camera van- we chatted for about 10 minutes about how much pe sucks, he told me what the department would want to charge me with, but he wasn’t going to bother, basically hinted not to do it during broad daylight and I’d most likely be fine…

  10. Sharon Browning says:

    I didn’t know I had a red light -camera-ticket-coming from a hospital at 3a m -not speeding and had the papers left in my door and last week the Mesa court called to tell me of the almost $400 fine for missing court. I quickly went to the court and judge-no policeman to come to court-and went a second time to ask for driving school at $187-that is entirely too much money. Where is our right to face our accuser and plead facts and mercy and maybe a no-show. Bring on the election.

  11. rick says:

    I received a photo radar ticket in a company vehicle. Is there any way to get around this?

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 )

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: