Military community petition against red light cameras and insurance lobby support

imported post

Should gun owners approve of red light and other "ticket cameras"?

After all, they might reduce the need for police to actually pull people over and inquire about gun possession during the traffic stop.

On the other hand, some folks in the military community membership of USAA, Inc., the military community's insurance and financial conglomerate, out outraged that USAA has gotten into bed with the insurance lobby to support red light cameras and the lobby's questionable "studies" used to support red light cameras.

If you are a USAA member go to http://www.petitiononline.com/1109USAA and read the petition and consider signing.

The effort is part of a campaign against USAA's support for red light cameras called http://www.houstoncoalition.net

imported post

I'm 100% against the use of red light cameras or use of cameras for any type of traffic safety enforcement, more correctly known as government revenue generation cameras.

That being said, I'm not sure how this relates to open carry,Second Amendment rights or guns in any way, shape or form. Because it doesn't. IMO, this is just a way for the forum owner to publicize an issue that he feels strongly about, an issue that if I or any other member posted would be removed for being off topic. Just add the word "gun" to the post and it makes it okay.

Smells of hypocrisy to me.

imported post

Mike wrote:

Should gun owners approve of red light and other "ticket cameras"?

After all, they might reduce the need for police to actually pull people over and inquire about gun possession during the traffic stop.

On the other hand, some folks in the military community membership of USAA, Inc., the military community's insurance and financial conglomerate, out outraged that USAA has gotten into bed with the insurance lobby to support red light cameras and the lobby's questionable "studies" used to support red light cameras.

If you are a USAA member go to http://www.petitiononline.com/1109USAA and read the petition and consider signing.

The effort is part of a campaign against USAA's support for red light cameras called http://www.houstoncoalition.net

Click to expand...

Red light cameras have ben an on again-off again subject here in Middle Tennessee for a couple years.

The city to my north (Goodletsville, TN) installed a few at some "key" intersections last year. The city claims that they have reduced accidents at those intersections.

Another city to my east (Murfresboro, TN) is considering installing them, and I understand that Memphis has had them for a few years.

As my area of Tennessee has relatively little to fear about police encounters and legally armed citizens, I have a different set of likes and dislikes about red light cameras (or other forms of unmanned traffic enforcement).

I like that traffic laws are getting enforced. My opinion is that if there is a law (legal, non-preempted), enforce it regularly. It matters not if its a major or minor law. If the law doesn't make sense, change it to make sense.

I dislike that there is the possibility that the owner of the vehicle (one ticketed) is not necessarily the driver of the vehicle.

I like that they free up police officers to concentrate on other crimes that could lower overall crime rates and put criminals in prison.

I dislike that police would not be enforcing traffic laws and regulations and ultimately decrease safety on the roadways. A ticket in the mail a week or more after the traffic transgression doesn't have the same impact that a police officer staring you in the face does.


EDIT: In response to hp-hobo - IMO, there is nothing wrong with using traffic laws for revenue generation. If they are so used, don't tell us its for safety. If the laws are for safety reasons, create punishments that would effectively discourage breaking them. The way things are set up in many places in the US that I have lived, is a system of government hypocrisy.

imported post

Oops!

imported post

It's always amusing to see a military group bitching about something the "law enforcement" community does.
Kinda like one leg complaining where the other leg is going.

imported post

Red light camera's are a targeted form of taxation, and therefor unconstitutional.

I say taxation, not penalty, because it doesn't go against your record, and it targets the OWNER OF THE VEHICLE, NOT THE DRIVER

imported post

Most of these schemes take a photo of the license plate and the operator of the vehicle, then if the license plate and the photo of the driver are BOTH discernable they send a ticket to the REGISTERED OWNER OF SAID VEHICLE. They make the assumption that the operator of the vehicle is in fact the registered owner.

I have heard of some being told by the courts that even in the clear evidence that the driver photographed was NOT THE REGISTERED OWNER that the charges would not be dropped UNLESS the court was told who the operator was so that they could be charged!

IDISAPROVE OFANY SCHEME WHERE THE ASSUMPTION IS MADE THAT THE VEHICLE OBSERVED ALLEGEDLY VIOLATING A TRAFFIC LAW IS IN FACT BEING OPERATED BY THE REGISTERED OWNER.

The government must prove that I am guilty and making me prove that I am NOT GUILTY is a violation of my constitutional protections.

The ONLY way I MIGHT approve of this scheme is for the government to pay the falsely accused a significant penalty assessment for afalse accusation ...as inthegreater of10 times the actual cost incurred(lost wages, attorney fees, copying of documents, etc)or $1000.00in provingones innocence!

imported post

The red light cameras in most of the municipalities in the state of MO do not take a picture of the driver, only the vehicle license plate and the registered owner gets the ticket in the mail.

A lot of the ticket recipients have wised up and appear in court andplead not guilty and state thatsomeone else was driving their car. Lots of tickets getting dismissed that way. But they still have to take a day off from work to appear.

imported post

hp-hobo wrote:

I'm 100% against the use of red light cameras or use of cameras for any type of traffic safety enforcement, more correctly known as government revenue generation cameras.

That being said, I'm not sure how this relates to open carry,Second Amendment rights or guns in any way, shape or form. Because it doesn't. IMO, this is just a way for the forum owner to publicize an issue that he feels strongly about, an issue that if I or any other member posted would be removed for being off topic. Just add the word "gun" to the post and it makes it okay.

Smells of hypocrisy to me.

Click to expand...

This, look how well its worked out for england. All you create is a police state, not safety. As for the gun issue it gives police another tool to step on peoples rights in the name of safty.

imported post

mark edward marchiafava wrote:

It's always amusing to see a military group bitching about something the "law enforcement" community does.
Kinda like one leg complaining where the other leg is going.

Click to expand...

Please do not make the mistake of conflating the military with the police. We are entirely seperate organisations, with entirely seperate rules and missions. If you are concerned about "militarization" of police departments, the actual military has absolutely nothing to do with that.

imported post

I've never liked them for the simple fact that they are not productive.

For instance, if I am speeding and get pulled over by a real cop, I SLOW DOWN thereafter.

Most people who get snapped by the red-light cameras don't know it and they keep on hauling ass down the road. They don't know it until they get the ticket in the mail.

What if someone was snapped by a red-light camera, and continued speeding down the road and hit some kid chasing his ball out into the road. Could an attorney claim in a civil suit that the state/city KNEW the offender was speeding (evidenced by the camera ticket) and took no action to stop the dangerous activity?

So far as it being a gun issue, I don't see any difference either way.

imported post

I am torn on the redlight camera issue, I have been hit on more than one occasion at an intersection by someone running a red-light! And it is your word against theirs and if the woman who hit you has a huge rack and a short skirt, guess who is getting blamed for the wreck!!
Running red lights is a true safety issue IMO, unlike doing a few MPH over PSL on a deserted 6-lane freeway and getting tickets mailed to you with no immediate intervention or LEO testifying that they witnessed the alleged event.

Speed cameras!! Wholeheartedly against them! those are nothing but revenue generators with no way of making the streets safer. Look up the case in Phoenix or Scottsdalewhere a guy got 5 tickets in 5 mile stretch of roadfor doing 10MPH or less over the PSL.
I should check to see if that suit against the city/statesettled yet

imported post

How many of us are USAA members and can actually sign this petition?

imported post

I think traffic cameras make excellent targets for when you need "urban tactical" practice with your night-scoped, suppressed "black rifle"...

imported post

Dreamer wrote:

I think traffic cameras make excellent targets for when you need "urban tactical" practice with your night-scoped, suppressed "black rifle"...

Click to expand...

but those are evil!

imported post

Looks like things are heatin' up!

http://www.mmdnewswire.com/red-light-cameras-6373.html

Military Members Revolt Against Insurance Giant's Support of Red-Light Cameras



E-mail |Print| PDF

Houston, TX (MMD Newswire) December 4, 2009 -- The Houston, TX Coalition Against Red-Light Cameras (HoustonCoalition.net) is proud to announce an online petition targeting the United Services Automobile Association's support for red light cameras.

The United Services Automobile Association (USAA) is an insurance and financial services conglomerate serving the U.S. military community and their families.

The petition illustrates the USAA military community's objection to USAA's support for ticket camera schemes which are well known to have a negative impact on traffic safety but are nonetheless deployed to raise revenue.

Numerous studies have documented that traffic accidents and accident-related injuries, often increase at intersections after ticket cameras have been installed. The USAA support of red-light cameras ignores these studies to march in lockstep with the auto insurance lobby which benefits from the increased number of citations issued by red-light cameras.

Details of the HCARLC petition, and comments by petition signers, can be found at http://www.PetitionOnline.com/1109USAA/petition.html. Studies that document the negative effect of red-light cameras on traffic safety have been compiled by the National Motorists Association, and can be found at http://www.motorists.org/photoenforce/home/studies/.

For more information about this organized action against the USAA, go to http://www.houstoncoalition.net/usaa_action.

The founder of the Houston Coalition Against Red Light Cameras (as they are presently utilized) is H.F. Van Der Grinten, who also is currently a USAA member.

Media Contact:
HoustonCoalition.net Founder:
Mr. H. F. Van Der Grinten
USAA Member
Website: www.houstoncoalition.net
Home page: www.captain-van.com

###

imported post

I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that the USAA recently loosened their membership requirements to include honorably discharged veterans? Maybe they knew they would lose some members over this issue.

Seems unlikely, but when it comes to bean counters, I don't discount any whacky possibilities.

TFred

imported post

TFred wrote:

I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that the USAA recently loosened their membership requirements to include honorably discharged veterans?

Click to expand...

I think former military members were always welcome into USAA as full members.

imported post

I'm not sure about this yet. I am a USAA member. I'll look into it before I make my decision.

imported post

ourmanthejoker wrote:

I'm not sure about this yet. I am a USAA member. I'll look into it before I make my decision.

Click to expand...

Sign into the main USAA page and look in upper right - you will see a discussion thread on USAA's intranet re USAA's PAC backing federal bills to force states to make cell phone use unlawful - somthing garanteed to increase actual traffic stops and LEO interaction with gun owners on the road.