Local Weather

by Happy HarperValley Rez

In the thread...
For those who voted NO
Main Street Monroe | Profile | Active Topics | Members | Search | FAQ
 All Forums
 Community Issues
 The Voice
 Speed Cameras - $97,000 in 12 days.

Note: You must be registered in order to post a reply.

Screensize:
UserName:
Password:
Message:

* HTML is ON
* Forum Code is OFF
Smilies
Smile [:)] Big Smile [:D] Cool [8D] Blush [:I]
Tongue [:P] Evil [):] Wink [;)] Clown [:o)]
Black Eye [B)] Eight Ball [8] Frown [:(] Shy [8)]
Shocked [:0] Angry [:(!] Dead [xx(] Sleepy [|)]
Kisses [:X] Approve [^] Disapprove [V] Question [?]

 
Check here to subscribe to this topic.
   

T O P I C    R E V I E W
MFD50 Posted - 10/17/2012 : 07:56:26 AM
New Miami is now using speed cameras and has recorded 1000 speed violations in 12 days at $97 each.

NEW MIAMI —


Three portable, unmanned cameras positioned along U.S. 127 and Seven Mile Avenue have recorded nearly 1,000 speeding violations in the first 12 days of operation, according to New Miami police.

“This is an additional safety program being initiated,” New Miami Police Chief Kenny Cheek said of the speed cameras, which went into service Oct. 1. “We hope the cameras will slow people down.”

Cheek said the one-mile stretch of U.S. 127 that goes through the village has a 35 mph speed limit, but thousands of vehicles traveling along it daily average between 46 and 48 mph. The cameras will photograph any vehicle traveling 11 mph over the speed limit, and violators will be fined $95 per offense, he said.


http://www.middletownjournal.com/news/news/cameras-boost-speeding-tickets-in-new-miami/nSfNM/

10   L A T E S T    R E P L I E S    (Newest First)
retiredmilitary Posted - 10/18/2012 : 12:09:38 PM
The only problem I see with the cameras is how can you tell for sure the person driving the vehicle at that time is the registered owner?

I have three vehicles in my name so if I am at work and receive a ticket in the mail then when I go to court and plead not guilty and the ticket gets thrown out how much money has been wasted then?

Just my opinion
logicgate Posted - 10/18/2012 : 07:49:29 AM
Did anyone really notice that the statement said, "The cameras will photograph any vehicle traveling 11 mph over the speed limit"

I think 11 miles over in any case is more than fair for receiving a ticket on a secondary road.

I'd rather have a cop out fighting/preventing crime etc... and let cameras take care of 11 mile an hour over speeders any day. That sounds like a efficient use of resources to me.

People know (or should) posted speed limits. If you go over them, you are agreeing to take the risk of getting a ticket. People go over the speed limit on a regular basis and don't get tickets. When you finally get popped for one..... it is what it is....
blueblood Posted - 10/18/2012 : 06:14:34 AM
quote:
[i]Originally posted by MFD50[/i]
[br]I have to agree with the mass. The cameras are a way to get income that they don't have to pay anything for. All the costs of the cameras are absorbed by the company for a percentage of the fines. And that is what gets me the most. A municipality, or township getting the money does not bother me as much as we should not be speeding or running lights. But a company profiting on the backs of the cameras is wrong. Let the municipality pay for the cameras and get 100% of the fines. Then they can pay the companys to keep up the cameras in working order.

This speaks to the fact that the individual city/municipality is incapable of managing the system to operate effectively. It all sounds good on paper, but in reality, this is why we are in the sad shape we are in as a nation. Government is incapable of running almost anything efficiently, and the private sector can run for profit/efficiency and beat them every time.

It all comes down to a cat and mouse stream of revenue. Yes, people are speeding and breaking the literal intent of the law, and for policing this, we pay dearly. We as a society, break all kinds of laws and we pick and choose the ones we will/can enforce, and let the others go, and yet we seem to be compelled to write more laws which will ultimately be selectively enforced. A knee jerk reaction to whatever the situation might be, and whatever belief a group might have.

I really do like skydivers's stealth system though.
MFD50 Posted - 10/17/2012 : 10:17:40 PM
I have to agree with the mass. The cameras are a way to get income that they don't have to pay anything for. All the costs of the cameras are absorbed by the company for a percentage of the fines. And that is what gets me the most. A municipality, or township getting the money does not bother me as much as we should not be speeding or running lights. But a company profiting on the backs of the cameras is wrong. Let the municipality pay for the cameras and get 100% of the fines. Then they can pay the companys to keep up the cameras in working order.
Matt_Steele Posted - 10/17/2012 : 4:23:35 PM
quote:
[i]Originally posted by John Beagle[/i]
[br]Will technology make Sparky obsolete?

How much money could the city make on Cin-Day alone?

Why not put them on every major thoroughfare to maximize investment?

Let's put cameras on stop signs. Everyone who doesn't come to a complete stop gets a $95 ticket.

In downtown London, you can not take more than 5 steps without being on camera.

Perhaps George Orwell had the wrong year. Not 1984, 2014.




Well I'm certainly confused how penalizing people for breaking a long standing law that you would be penalized for if a cop witnessed you do it is Orwellian.

I'm not in favor of speed cameras or cameras regardless but I mean, the point is that the laws exist for a reason right? You're supposed to stop at a stop sign or red light, you're supposed to only go the maximum speed limit etc etc

I think there's a decent question to be asked about the methods or judgement of using the cameras, but I think the overall goal (more safety) is a good one.

(And YES, I know and understand that people's perceptions are that the cameras are only there to make money and I agree that that is a large part of it, I also think though, that the only way people are charged money is if they're breaking the letter of the law)


Now London... that's a different can of worms lol
skydiver Posted - 10/17/2012 : 2:14:10 PM




There are no federal laws in the U.S.A. that prohibit the ownership and/or operation of laser jammers.

However, some states have enacted their own laws that do prohibit the ownership and/or use of these devices. These states include: California, Nebraska, Minnesota, Utah, Oklahoma, Tennessee, South Carolina, Virginia, Colorado, Illinois, and Washington DC.
Bob Kelley Posted - 10/17/2012 : 10:29:28 AM
Sparks is working Cin-Day right now, check at the end of his shift and you will know.
quote:
Originally posted by John Beagle

Will technology make Sparky obsolete?

How much money could the city make on Cin-Day alone?


Steve Black Posted - 10/17/2012 : 09:55:27 AM
The Public Safety Committee already nixed this idea.
John Beagle Posted - 10/17/2012 : 09:13:25 AM
Will technology make Sparky obsolete?

How much money could the city make on Cin-Day alone?

Why not put them on every major thoroughfare to maximize investment?

Let's put cameras on stop signs. Everyone who doesn't come to a complete stop gets a $95 ticket.

In downtown London, you can not take more than 5 steps without being on camera.

Perhaps George Orwell had the wrong year. Not 1984, 2014.
Upper90 Posted - 10/17/2012 : 08:41:20 AM
Such crap, safety my hind end. I have traveled that stretch of 127 daily for nearly 20 years and not once, not one freaking time have I seen an accident or one being cleaned up. It was always so heavily patrolled that I just always went the limit so I am good. But this has nothing to do with safety.

MainStreetMonroe.com Terms of Use © MainStreetMonroe.com Go To Top Of Page

Advertising Information

Main Street Monroe was started by Monroe, Ohio resident John Beagle in 1998