Another One For The “Each Ticket is Reviewed by an Officer” Folder

In photo enforcement programs across the country, the claims continue to be made that “each violation is reviewed by an officer” before a ticket is mailed. The reality is that violations are either NOT reviewed by officers or the standards of evidence are much lower than anyone would imagine. In many cases, the camera companies and the municipalities are just eager to bring in a check so they send out a ticket regardless of the consequences to the innocent.

Take this recent AZ DPS photo ticket, for example, where it is not even possible to distinguish any features of the driver whatsoever (click on photo to enlarge). This didn’t stop Redflex from mailing the bogus ticket in the hopes that someone who didn’t know better would help them boost their profit margins.

According to the IIHS, the driver of the vehicle is NOT the owner of the vehicle over 28% of the time, which means that photo enforcement has a built-in 28% identify error rate even before we consider equipment malfunctions, corporate-owned vehicles, missing/ineligible plates, and system and processing errors.

Imagine for a moment what this country’s founders would say about a law enforcement system with a built-in error rate greater than 1 in 4 where the recipient must prove that he wasn’t driving in order to be found innocent. Imagine if you would re-elect a local sheriff if their department arrested the wrong person over 28% of the time. When did Arizona decide that a law enforcement system that heavily burdens the innocent is what we want?

Oh that’s right, the people or Arizona have never voted on this issue! Jan Brewer: Put photo enforcement on the ballot!

17 Responses to Another One For The “Each Ticket is Reviewed by an Officer” Folder

    • reason says:

      Read your post wrong, thought they were raffling off the Constitution.

      Reminds me of my favorite Leno joke…

      “Did you hear, Iraq is going to get a new Constitution this week… Yeah, I heard they got a good deal on our old one, we weren’t using it anymore.”

  1. Sure says:


    On September 1, the City Clerk Department will begin posting contracts on (Internet) within 72 hours of the City Clerk completing the attestation process. This new addition will allow citizens to perform their own public records searches for contracts via the Internet, thus reducing city staff time to locate, copy, or forward contracts. The public requesting contracts prior to September 1 will still need to contact the City Clerk Department.

  2. Liberal Socialist says:

    Michael Badnarik is a tool.

    Also, he’s a software engineer. I trust Barak Obama, whose education actually COVERS the Constitution VERY thoroughly, to know more about it than a software engineer, who seeks to eliminate regulation of any industry.

    He’s also a fucking whackjob who thinks the sixteenth amendment wasn’t properly ratified. This issue has been well researched, and has long since been put to rest.

  3. Will Kay says:

    Governor Brewer, if you want my vote, photo radar enforcement better be on the ballot!

  4. reason says:

    Excellent article once again….

  5. People want to depend on technology thinking it’s always more accurate than a human being. It’s simply not true.

    Even radar detectors have major flaws, but when a person is operating one, at least there’s a check in place.

    • reason says:

      I smell a rat…

      I’m all for a 3rd party study. I’m not for the sensors staying on for Redflex to fudge the numbers.

      Something is amiss with this whole thing.

  6. Dr Jett says:

    Look at God’s Word about governments running amok as the State of Arizona is currently: Isiah 1:21 to 1:26

    21 See how the faithful city
    has become a harlot!
    She once was full of justice;
    righteousness used to dwell in her—
    but now murderers!

    22 Your silver has become dross,
    your choice wine is diluted with water.

    23 Your rulers are rebels,
    companions of thieves;
    they all love bribes
    and chase after gifts.
    They do not defend the cause of the fatherless;
    the widow’s case does not come before them.

    24 Therefore the Lord, the LORD Almighty,
    the Mighty One of Israel, declares:
    “Ah, I will get relief from my foes
    and avenge myself on my enemies.

    25 I will turn my hand against you;
    I will thoroughly purge away your dross
    and remove all your impurities.

    26 I will restore your judges as in days of old,
    your counselors as at the beginning.
    Afterward you will be called
    the City of Righteousness,
    the Faithful City.”

  7. Betsy Ross says:

    All of this regarding being able to “identify” the drivers seems to me to be so much red herring…

    The point is, the infraction is “exceeding a speed that is reasonable and prudent,” and since these cameras do not record traffic flow, weather conditions, or anything else relevant to the actual charge, then most of these tickets are bogus with the exception of those that are cutting in and out of traffice and the problem there lies the rub…since it is too easy then for the cameras to record the wrong driver and not the one who is driving recklessly.

    Reckless endangerment is the common law “crime” for any and all moving violations, and just goes to show that these cameras were illegally placed to begin with, without the technology being to the point where all relevant driving factors and conditions could be programmed….and just how many people would that take, actually, then to monitor and continually program them?

    What a true scam…and since this is, after all, an Australian and Scottsdale based company, doesn’t surprise me in the least.

  8. Dr Jett says:

    Oh My,
    I didn’t claim to be a religious person, merely stating the biblical perspective.
    If you are interested in who is breaking the law, read this legal case so you can become educated in how the State is breaking the law. The 50 states have never done the traffic engineering studies, which are required every 5 years to even know what the legal speed limit would be in 2010.

  9. Wrong says:

    One major error here, photo radar was approved by AZ voters via public ballot in 1986.

  10. confidential says:

    ATS van drivers are now processing INSIDE the vans. Conflict of interest?

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: