Is Photo Radar Affecting the 2010 Census in Arizona?

May 9, 2010

By now, almost everyone in Arizona knows that you must be served with a photo ticket for it to be legally valid. As such, the citizens have become accustomed to dodging process servers in order to avoid having to respond to tickets received in the mail. The main aspect of avoiding process service is to avoid answering your door for anyone you don’t know or who anyone you are not expecting to visit your home. Do this for long enough and you get out of your photo ticket Scott-free.

But this is also a census year, and those who do not respond by mail will be receiving in-person visits from census workers. The census response is very important to state and local governments, as each person counted is worth $25,000 federal and state dollars for their community over 10 years.

This is where Arizona may have shot itself in the foot with photo radar. As citizens have become accustomed to not answering their doors for unexpected visitors for fear of being served with a photo ticket, it is likely that many census workers will be unable to contact citizens who would have otherwise answered their door before Arizona’s photo enforcement experiment. With reported state photo program revenues reported to be around $35M, it means that if more than 1400 citizens go uncounted because they refuse to open their doors for fear of photo radar process service, the state will actually end up losing money.

KOLD reports that 30% of Arizonans have not sent in their forms and will be getting a visit from a census worker. There are hundreds of thousands of drivers who have not responded to their photo tickets who are weary of being served. It’s not hard to estimate that there is easily a population of more than 1400 who will go uncounted, since each address likely has several residents. Arizona needs every response it can get, as ABC15 has reported that Arizona’s response rate is “lackluster.”

So much for a program that was supposed to make money for the state, and all of this at the height of a recession when Arizona needs all of the funds it can get. An undercount could also lead to losing a seat in the leglislature. What was touted as a way for the state to make millions may end up costing Arizona dearly. These are all unintended consequences, and for that, we can all thank former governor Janet Napolitano.

Avoiding Photo Enforcement, Tip #23

January 30, 2010

In this 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.

According to Arizona civil procedure, photo enforcement tickets are required to be personally served in order to be legally enforceable. This requirement makes it virtually impossible for a segment of our population to receive photo tickets. The best part? It’s 100% legal and doesn’t require dodging process servers. Want to know how? There are actually two such methods.

Method #1: Register your vehicles in the name of a corporation or a trust. Since a corporation cannot be served, photo tickets will never become enforceable. This won’t stop them from mailing tickets to your company, as Redflex and ATS remain hopeful that the company will rat out the driver. But nevertheless, the tickets may be tossed without concern.

Caveat: Check with your insurance company before doing this. Changing your registration may cause you to lose discounts that you otherwise qualify for. It may not be worth it.

Method #2: Change your vehicle registration address to a private mailbox (PMB). This is not the same as a PO Box, as you cannot register vehicles to a PO Box. A PMB is a mailbox service that you can purchase from a place like the UPS Store or Mailboxes, Etc. Since these locations provide you with an actual street address, your address is legal for the purpose of vehicle registration.

Caveat: Since most of these stores are private franchises and each owner may be different, you’ll may want to check what their policy is with regard to turning over your personal information should a process server request it. Most owners will protect your identity.

Bonus Tip: If you are married, register the wife’s car in the husband’s name, and the husband’s car in the wife’s name. If they try to match sex from the photo to the registration, they may toss the ticket or may do no more than mail a letter if there is a mismatch.

Ban Photo Radar: Demonstration Today in Chandler, AZ

February 20, 2009


Its time to make another great showing of solidarity and determination. Automated ticketing and overzealous surveillance will no longer be tolerated in the Grand Canyon State.

Come on out anytime between 3:00 and 7:00!


Also a good idea: Forward this event to a friend, call a co-worker with the news, or for you Twitter users why not consider posting an update to your account?


Mississippi Bans Photo Enforcement

February 17, 2009

Resistance to automated ticketing is spreading nationwide. The Mississippi State Legislature has decisively voted 117 to 3 to ban photo enforcement in the state.

Maricopa County Judge: Photo Enforcement Unconstitutional

January 28, 2009

gavel-slamIt looks like the courts are finally beginning to catch on.

According to Judge John Keegan, the law violates the U.S. Constitution because it denies equal protection under the law.

He says it also crosses a clause on equal privileges and immunities in Arizona’s state Constitution.

Go read the story…

Taxes, Lies and Video…”tape”

January 27, 2009

taxes-lies-and-videotapeThe propaganda war has begun.  It is indisputable that CameraFraud has gotten the ball rolling toward permanently ridding Arizona of photo enforcement.  We brought the issue to our representatives, prompting HB 2106.  We also brought the issue to the media, and to the people of Arizona.  In doing so we have threatened the multi-million dollar interests of the corporations that profit from this infringement upon the rights of the people.  It then stands to reason that these interests are worth protecting by those corporations as well as the state and municipal officials whose coffers promise to be filled with the ill gotten gains stolen from the people of Arizona.

This amounts to nothing more than illegal taxes.

Public opinion for sale.

The results of both public polls and statistics can be, and often are, purchased by the highest bidder, usually when trying to bolster a weak argument.  Figures as ludicrous as 68% in favor of Photo Enforcement have been published as paid for by ATS!  That number is patently false and would be laughable if not for the fact that it shows just how far these despotic politicians and leech corporations will go to shore up their illicit practices, all the while insulting the intelligence of the public.  Given that the Photo Enforcement companies and the public officials who wish to abuse the public trust stand to lose a great deal of money if Photo Enforcement is banned in Arizona, it is not a big leap to realize that they will use any dishonest means to try to save their new cash cow.

Auto Insurance companies chime in

Insurance companies have become more vocal of late in the argument on Photo Enforcement.  Not surprising. For years the big insurance companies have profited from traffic enforcement, but have been cut out of the deal with Photo Enforcement in Arizona.  Why?  Well you see if drivers were issued points for the tickets generated by Photo Enforcement it’s a sure thing that eventually enough drivers would be affected that they would become more politically inclined be opposed to the cameras as well as possibly be taken out of the driving pool altogether.  If taken out of the driving pool they would cease being a viable host for the parasite of tyrannical governmental fees, inflated insurance premiums, and taxes.  The optimal situation for any parasite is not to kill the host, but instead to slowly bleed them. Effectively killing the host is unacceptable to the powers that be because in reality, as we all know, Photo Enforcement is not about public safety, but instead about revenue.  This puts Photo Enforcement at odds with big insurance and its lobby.  It will be interesting to see how this plays out in the future.  Both sides of the argument say that it is THEY who have the best interest of the public at heart, in much the same way two vultures have the best interest of a disemboweled carcass at heart.

This amounts to nothing more than lies.

Last but not least, Video… “Tape”

During committee hearings on HB 2106 not withstanding Redflex’s perjury, DPS was forced to admit that, not only do the Photo Enforcement installations video record 24/7, but that the data is retained for an undetermined period of time.

Now folks, herein lay the biggest threat to civil liberties in our lifetime.  Even committee members who voted against passing HB 2106  through committee expressed grave concern at this revelation.  Speeding tickets IE. Civil Infractions are a minor footnote when compared to the tragedy of violations to fourth amendment of the US constitution by these surveillance platforms.

By using an alternate route legally speaking, “authority” can circumvent the intent and spirit of the fourth amendment.  Even though the information collected by these systems is supposedly done by “civil” authority under the pretense of traffic control, the mere existence of said video defacto violates the US Constitution. The information can, and will, be used for other unintended purposes.

This abuse of power must end.

“Web sites dispute radar van obstruction case”

September 2, 2008

From the Arizona Republic:

SCOTTSDALE – Two Valley Web sites dispute Scottsdale police accounts of an Aug. 27 arrest of a man accused of blocking cameras at a photo-radar van.

Both sites cite a video depicting events but have not made the video public.

[…] the Web sites claim Shelton was shooting video of the protest, not holding signs. Shelton is a freelance videographer for multiple Web sites, including

[a] volunteer, said that Shelton’s tape contradicts accounts from Scottsdale police. opposes the use of photo radar in Scottsdale.

Well, that’s fairly accurate, although we oppose the use of photo radar everywhere, not just in Scottsdale.

Press Release: “FACT vs FICTION”

August 29, 2008

SCOTTSDALE, AZ, Aug 29, 2008 (Direct news media distribution)

FACT: Demonstrators were peacefully holding anti-photo enforcement signs in Scottsdale on Shea Boulevard the night of August 27, 2008.

FACT: Despite initially saying the demonstrators needed sign permits, the Scottsdale Police officers who were present changed their story after one demonstrator said that he had the only permit he needed— the Constitution of the United States.

FACT: The person who was arrested was not a demonstrator, but rather a journalist who was videographing the event for local media site “”

FACT: The person who was arrested never held up a sign the entire evening.

FACT: Scottsdale Police never arrested the two persons who were actually holding signs.

FACT: Scottsdale Police claim that holding a sign near a photo radar van is “Obstruction of Government Operations,” when in fact the photo van in question is owned and registered to a private corporation.

FACT: Detailed video footage of the incident was taken by the person arrested, at which point the camera was then handed over to one of the actual protestors. The video taken seems to strongly contradict the story provided by the Scottsdale Police, and is being reviewed by attorneys.

Redflex Group is a privately-held company based in Australia performing law-enforcement activities in the United States1.

American Traffic Solutions, Inc., is headquartered in Scottsdale AZ, along with the company’s Orwellian “Global Network Operations Center,” which is “linked to all active cameras and data collection devices worldwide”2., founded in 2008, is a non-partisan group dedicated to “Slowing, Stopping, and Reversing the Theft of our Privacy.” They can be reached online at Limited media interviews or questions may be requested via email at



Deceit, Dollars, and Disgruntled Employees…

August 27, 2008

…Oh my!

I’m a firm believer in the “law of unintended consequences.” One “unintended consequence” of’s recent launch was the downright flood of emails we received from current and former disgruntled employees of Redflex and ATS.

Apparently the two “leading” scam cam vendors are having a hard time keeping their own employees on their side. One gentleman who works for ATS was complaining about making only $13 an hour for his role in operating one of Scottsdale’s mobile van units. Someone claiming to work for Redflex writes in, saying that internal management is downright-Reich-like (say THAT ten times fast).

Anyways, keep up the emails guys. We enjoy hearing from you too.

“All They Want To Do Is Take Your Money”

August 26, 2008

New video shows valley demonstators have taken to the highways to object to Redflex’s illegal and illegitimate photo enforcement vans. The vehicles, which are “fully dressed” as DPS Highway Patrol vehicles, are owned and operated by the Australian firm, possibly in violation of multiple Arizona Revised Statues (We’ll have more on this later).

Those advocating the removal of the vans argue that a greater police presence is the only proven method to reduce traffic fatalities, as automated enforcement cameras cannot catch drunk drivers or stolen cars.

See the video at Youtube and be sure to send it to your friends.

%d bloggers like this: