CameraFRAUD’s “Worst Person In the World”


What do you call people who talk tough when it comes to a boycott over Arizona’s SB1070 but can’t seem to get enough of the stolen money they procure through automated ticketing?

The entire Los Angeles City Council.

Today we shamelessly borrow from MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann “Worst Persons” segment in nominating Councilman Richard Alarcon as the “Worst of the Worst” for his comments regarding the city’s contract with beseiged scam provider American Traffic Solutions:

Councilman Tom LaBonge strongly backed the LAPD, citing a report that there have been no deaths from red-light-running accidents at affected intersections since cameras were installed. Councilman Richard Alarcon warned that if the cameras were shutdown and someone was killed at one of those intersections, “the media would have a field day.

Of course, lets not let statistical fact get in the way of Alarcon waving the “safety” flag. From the same article:

The LAPD’s statistics show that about half of the 32 photo-enforced intersections have either had no change in accidents or an increase, said Councilwoman Janice Hahn.

Being as bold to make up a meaningless uncorrelated statistic such as “no deaths at red light camera intersections” while ignoring the data of their own police department showing that red light cameras have actually had a negative effect on safety is classic intellectual dishonesty.

7th District LA Councilman Richard Alarcon: You are today’s Worst Person in the World!

[Bonus! Send Alarcon a message using his online web form here]

23 Responses to CameraFRAUD’s “Worst Person In the World”

  1. Wow, not one positive comment about LA City Council on the LA Times article

  2. Stacey says:

    City Councilman Zine received campaign contributions from Redflex. I wonder if other members did too:

    CameraFRAUD.com

    Phoenix, AZ
    1,121 Volunteers

    Welcome to CameraFRAUD. We are united in our effort to get rid of every speed camera, red light camera, and photo radar van here in Arizona and across the country. We were suc…

    Check out this Meetup Group →

  3. kandaris says:

    These people who want a boycott while ignoring companies that *make them money* are just real scumbags. This is exactly the kind of pirate that needs to lose their job in the next election cycle that affects their post.

  4. ProCamera says:

    Funny, you claim they make baseless claims and follow it up with your own baseless claims. FYI, a rear end collision is usually much less severe in regards to vehicle damage and personal injury than a “Right Angle” or T-Bone accident. And Right Angle collisions have dropped. Sure, it is nearly impossible to make a camera that catches people who follow to close and rear end someone when they stop for a yellow light, but the camera are stopping the right angle collisions. That would be the right angle collisions that cause many of the fatalities that the council member stated.

    I think it is funny that they are backing off on the boycott. And I really don’t care that the city makes money off idiots that haven’t figured out how to judge a light or how to apply the brakes on their car.

    • metelhed says:

      So, according to your “FYI”, it’s much better to spread the damage around? And you also selectively ignore the sentence in the article that states “And some of the city’s worst intersections for traffic safety don’t have cameras”? You’re a shill, pure and simple. Maybe not directly employed, maybe not even compensated, but definitely a shill. And one with zero ethics, by your own statement. You don’t care if others have ethics, due to your own fear and paranoia that these cameras address.

    • camerafraud says:

      “FYI, a rear end collision is usually much less severe in regards to vehicle damage and personal injury than a “Right Angle” or T-Bone accident.”

      • Pro-Camera says:

        From the following study, by the US Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration
        http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/05048/index.cfm

        Study of 132 RLC sites across the nation.

        1. Total Right Angle Crashes decreased by 379 (1,542 – 1,163 decrease 24.6%)
        2. Total Rear End Collisions increased by 375 (2,521 – 2,896 increase 14.8%)
        3. Estimated Cost of Crashes decreased from $161,843,021 to $147,470,550 (8.9% Decrease) This includes the Property Damage Only reports.
        4. Using the nationwide standard of rating crashes (KABCO) The following was found
        K = Fatality
        A = Incapacitating
        B = Non Incapacitating
        C = Possible Injury
        O = Property Only

        Right Angle Collisions
        Before RLC 1854 Injury
        After RLC 634 Injury
        After Right Angle Percentages:
        K = .8%
        A = 8.5%
        B = 37.4%
        C = 53.3%

        Rear End Collisions
        Before RLC 1930 Injury
        After RLC 1008 Injury
        After Rear End Percentages:
        K = 0%
        A = 2.7%
        B = 13.5%
        C = 83.8%

        Conclusions from the report.
        “The combined results from the seven jurisdictions indicated a positive aggregate economic benefit of approximately $39,000 per site per year when property-damage-only (PDO) crashes are included and $50,000 per site per year when PDO crashes are excluded (table 21). These results indicate that the increase in rear end crash costs (due to the increase in frequency, with a lower severity) do not negate the savings in right-angle crash costs.

        Sorry to Burst your bubble.

        • B says:

          “The combined results from the seven jurisdictions indicated a positive aggregate economic benefit of approximately $39,000 per site per year when property-damage-only (PDO) crashes are included and $50,000 per site per year when PDO crashes are excluded (table 21).”
          ***********************
          This $50,000, “it saves money” argument is BS, and here’s why…

          It’s saving money for insurance companies.

          What does that do for the common man? Absolutely Nothing.

          Your blessed $50,000 savings comes at a cost of the common man because we have to deal with the increase in minor accidents and all the joy that comes along with them: The inconvenience accompanying accidents, the deductible money paid out, the new car payments and increased insurance/registration payment when your old car is wrecked from the rear end and gets blue booked out instead of repaired, etc.

          We haven’t even seen our deductibles significantly drop if these huge savings are truly occurring.

          Therefore, pro-camera bubble burster, you and your $50,000 per accident stat can eat shit…

  5. ProCamera,
    Have you signed our initiative to put photo radar on the ballot for November? It’s not too late.

    Let’s make sure the people get to decide whether photo radar stays or goes.

    If ATS and Redflex are correct, 80% of the public will vote to keep it. Wouldn’t that be your ultimate victory?

    • Pro-Camera says:

      If it comes to a vote, so be it. I do believe that the cameras will pass, especially when the only remaining cameras are the city cameras because hte DPS contract was not renewed. But since I like the system how it is, don’t expect me to go out of my way to sign your petition.

      • Dr Jett says:

        I was hit in a rear end collision in 1981 and I still have back and neck injuries from it. There is no such thing as a lessor accident especially since I usually ride a motorcycle. I recommend teaching drivers at a much higher skill level BEFORE they get a drivers license. That would actually reduce accidents that are usually caused by people, like you, who have mediocre driving skills. You would probably pass out if I took you through my extreme accident avoidance driving test. The accident statistics quoted would be dramatically lower if more people took driving seriously.

        • ProCamera says:

          Rear End Collision in 1981, wait, that was before red light cameras. How could that be? Oh yeah, I forgot, there were stupid drivers that don’t know what tailgating is before and after red light cameras.

          Sorry to say it, but your chronic back injury is MINOR to the person that gets tagged in a T-Bone accident and dies. And those type of accidents have went down.

        • Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

          what jett? is this extreme accident avoidance test? is this a real class you teach? how ever do you find the time when you are so busy getting paid to collect signatures…?

          and you actually charge for this wisdom?

          why would someone with neck and back injuries…ride a motorcycle?

  6. Stacey says:

    Until you get layed off by Redflex.

  7. RLC video format is foreign, PAL-SECAM and the U.S. video system is NTSC. Due to the difference in video formats, the frame speed is increased by 8 percent without affecting the “claimed” video continuity coding claimed by camera vendors. Result poisoned evidence creates and perpetuates a fraud. TheTicketDoctor.net

    • oh my says:

      and nothing here in the US plays PAL.
      So.. tell me how that works?

    • Law A. Bidingcitizen says:

      do you think that maybe what you wrote could be translated into english? i think its great you have found a way to help others for free!!!

    • oh my says:

      Law,
      It’s just another unfounded lie, worded to make it sound like it’s truth.
      He’s saying video recorded overseas is in PAL format. USA is NTSC. It’s like BETA vs. VHS, except it’s not a physical difference, it’s the format that the video is recorded in.
      What he’s saying is what his friends cousins first momma’s ex boyfriends cellmate told him.
      But… try feeding a PAL signal to anything here in USA, you don’t get anything, maybe test pattern and that’s it. It’s a stupid thought, it would be like trying to sell TV’s that worked on European voltage and funky looking plug, here in the US.
      The claims about PE have been quite crazy up to this point, can’t wait to see what else comes up!

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: