<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Ticket Cameras Used To Convict Drivers Without Their Knowledge</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/</link>
	<description>News For Drivers</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Nov 2009 04:16:40 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: P0'd Texan</title>
		<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/comment-page-1/#comment-14389</link>
		<dc:creator>P0'd Texan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Jul 2009 15:46:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motorists.org/blog/?p=414#comment-14389</guid>
		<description>Thanks for the feedback; too bad it trapped you too.  My cousin went by that site and said there is no camera there now but there are still construction barrels and apparent ongoing construction.  Am sending him a scan of the picture they sent of me so he can better tell where it might have been taken.  I asked him to look for any warnings about the speed being reduced from 55 to 45; he doesn&#039;t recall seeing any but will check again.  In my opinion, it&#039;s not fair for there not to be such a warning, and I was only going 57.  How &#039;bout you?  I hear what you&#039;re saying about the burden of proof being on us.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks for the feedback; too bad it trapped you too.  My cousin went by that site and said there is no camera there now but there are still construction barrels and apparent ongoing construction.  Am sending him a scan of the picture they sent of me so he can better tell where it might have been taken.  I asked him to look for any warnings about the speed being reduced from 55 to 45; he doesn&#8217;t recall seeing any but will check again.  In my opinion, it&#8217;s not fair for there not to be such a warning, and I was only going 57.  How &#8217;bout you?  I hear what you&#8217;re saying about the burden of proof being on us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Irate Kansan</title>
		<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/comment-page-1/#comment-14388</link>
		<dc:creator>Irate Kansan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 22:42:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motorists.org/blog/?p=414#comment-14388</guid>
		<description>I had the same problem...June 27 (same date!), same intersection, with an out-of-state plate from Kansas.  I hadn&#039;t seen any signs indicating that the speed limit changed from 55 to 45 (none are visible in the picture), and I didn&#039;t see any workers out there either.  Were you ever able to get a picture of the interstate?  I&#039;d like to be able to contest the ticket, but the burden of proof is on us, somehow, and not on the state....</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I had the same problem&#8230;June 27 (same date!), same intersection, with an out-of-state plate from Kansas.  I hadn&#8217;t seen any signs indicating that the speed limit changed from 55 to 45 (none are visible in the picture), and I didn&#8217;t see any workers out there either.  Were you ever able to get a picture of the interstate?  I&#8217;d like to be able to contest the ticket, but the burden of proof is on us, somehow, and not on the state&#8230;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: PO'd Texan</title>
		<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/comment-page-1/#comment-14363</link>
		<dc:creator>PO'd Texan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 03:57:44 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motorists.org/blog/?p=414#comment-14363</guid>
		<description>What a croc.  On 7-6-09, Albuquwerky sent me a &#039;present&#039; in the mail. On June 27th, 2009, I was eastbound on I-40 at the Carlisle exit with my family, returning home to Tx from an AZ vacation.  My speed? 57--oh, but wait, they say it was in a 45 mph work zone. Sent me a nice picture of the rear of my Sienna and if I would be so kind as to send them $75, they won&#039;t notify my state or insurance company and promise to keep it off my record (I don&#039;t have a record, not having received a ticket in over 33 years).  Those rat bastards said I could return to dispute the allegations by their mobile speed officer manning the camera, but I risk paying $50 more for my brashness plus the $75 if I didn&#039;t make my case.  

I have a nephew checking that particular part of I-40 and whether there was indeed a fair warning about the drop in speed from 55 to 45 and if it is a construction zone (no workers present that day).  He thinks they go after out-of-state vehicles in particular because they&#039;ll pay up, not being willing or financially able to return; when he showed up in court to fight a ticket the officer was a no show, case dismissed.  So how bad can they screw me from afar if i don&#039;t pay up?  I welcome any and all responses or comments.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>What a croc.  On 7-6-09, Albuquwerky sent me a &#8216;present&#8217; in the mail. On June 27th, 2009, I was eastbound on I-40 at the Carlisle exit with my family, returning home to Tx from an AZ vacation.  My speed? 57&#8211;oh, but wait, they say it was in a 45 mph work zone. Sent me a nice picture of the rear of my Sienna and if I would be so kind as to send them $75, they won&#8217;t notify my state or insurance company and promise to keep it off my record (I don&#8217;t have a record, not having received a ticket in over 33 years).  Those rat bastards said I could return to dispute the allegations by their mobile speed officer manning the camera, but I risk paying $50 more for my brashness plus the $75 if I didn&#8217;t make my case.  </p>
<p>I have a nephew checking that particular part of I-40 and whether there was indeed a fair warning about the drop in speed from 55 to 45 and if it is a construction zone (no workers present that day).  He thinks they go after out-of-state vehicles in particular because they&#8217;ll pay up, not being willing or financially able to return; when he showed up in court to fight a ticket the officer was a no show, case dismissed.  So how bad can they screw me from afar if i don&#8217;t pay up?  I welcome any and all responses or comments.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/comment-page-1/#comment-14362</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Jul 2009 00:13:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motorists.org/blog/?p=414#comment-14362</guid>
		<description>southernboy I see that you are the idiot that believes everything that the theNewspaper.com prints.   If you want to prove that you are right then go and time the yellow lights yourself and I will bow down to your thenewspaper.com if you are correct.   I will bet you anything that they are wrong.  They often search the country high  and low for bits of facts years old and then slant it their direction with lies and then they print it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>southernboy I see that you are the idiot that believes everything that the theNewspaper.com prints.   If you want to prove that you are right then go and time the yellow lights yourself and I will bow down to your thenewspaper.com if you are correct.   I will bet you anything that they are wrong.  They often search the country high  and low for bits of facts years old and then slant it their direction with lies and then they print it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/comment-page-1/#comment-14322</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2009 02:23:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motorists.org/blog/?p=414#comment-14322</guid>
		<description>George, this is part of a linked study that this web site supports for red light safety:

“Enforcement efforts are likely to reduce violations occurring primarily in the first few seconds of red and, therefore, should significantly reduce left-turn-opposed crashes. In an indirect manner, these efforts should also reduce some right-angle crashes by encouraging driver compliance with the signal.”</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>George, this is part of a linked study that this web site supports for red light safety:</p>
<p>“Enforcement efforts are likely to reduce violations occurring primarily in the first few seconds of red and, therefore, should significantly reduce left-turn-opposed crashes. In an indirect manner, these efforts should also reduce some right-angle crashes by encouraging driver compliance with the signal.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/comment-page-1/#comment-14319</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 23:11:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motorists.org/blog/?p=414#comment-14319</guid>
		<description>George You did not read my statement. &quot; A yellow light should be timed to allow a safe stop&quot;  A safe stop definition is not slamming on your brakes.

What I was saying was that no matter what yellow light timing you have if there is no enforcement at the lights at all there will be people speeding up when they see a yellow light and will enter the intersection when it is red to save them time.   That is why the red light cameras were put into place in the first place.  You get all people to stop doing that and you will not need any enforcement.  In fact there would be no tickets given even if there was enforcement.  If you have not seen people speed up on a yellow to try to make it through then you must be blind.
 
Many intersection  already have your mutual red light you were recommending.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>George You did not read my statement. &#8221; A yellow light should be timed to allow a safe stop&#8221;  A safe stop definition is not slamming on your brakes.</p>
<p>What I was saying was that no matter what yellow light timing you have if there is no enforcement at the lights at all there will be people speeding up when they see a yellow light and will enter the intersection when it is red to save them time.   That is why the red light cameras were put into place in the first place.  You get all people to stop doing that and you will not need any enforcement.  In fact there would be no tickets given even if there was enforcement.  If you have not seen people speed up on a yellow to try to make it through then you must be blind.</p>
<p>Many intersection  already have your mutual red light you were recommending.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George</title>
		<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/comment-page-1/#comment-14318</link>
		<dc:creator>George</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 29 Jun 2009 16:09:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motorists.org/blog/?p=414#comment-14318</guid>
		<description>That is a load of crap. [I&#039;d be more worried about tractor/trailers which have light stopping ability]
Studies have shown increased compliance with a correct yellow light interval.

For your hypothetical &#039;true idiot&#039;, an increased, or added, mutual red light eliminates that problem-even if you have to take a half to whole second off the increased yellow light.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>That is a load of crap. [I'd be more worried about tractor/trailers which have light stopping ability]<br />
Studies have shown increased compliance with a correct yellow light interval.</p>
<p>For your hypothetical &#8216;true idiot&#8217;, an increased, or added, mutual red light eliminates that problem-even if you have to take a half to whole second off the increased yellow light.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/comment-page-1/#comment-14307</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 17:18:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motorists.org/blog/?p=414#comment-14307</guid>
		<description>southernboy I do not agree with your statement

&quot;Or how about the fact that lengthened yellows reduces accidents and does away with Scameras income ??&quot;

Once the true idiot realizes that yellow lights are longer they will start to enter an intersection later than ever thus you will still have a red light running problem.  Think for yourself if you can, what would you do if the yellow light increased a couple of seconds?   You and most here would compensate and enter an intersection later than ever because you and others here would not wait for up to a minute for the other lane of traffic to turn yellow and then wait another 7 or 8 seconds or whatever you come up with or would you try to skip through on a yellow light?  Pretty obvious to me.  A yellow light should be timed to allow a safe stop and not add another 3 or 4 seconds or cut it a second or two either.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>southernboy I do not agree with your statement</p>
<p>&#8220;Or how about the fact that lengthened yellows reduces accidents and does away with Scameras income ??&#8221;</p>
<p>Once the true idiot realizes that yellow lights are longer they will start to enter an intersection later than ever thus you will still have a red light running problem.  Think for yourself if you can, what would you do if the yellow light increased a couple of seconds?   You and most here would compensate and enter an intersection later than ever because you and others here would not wait for up to a minute for the other lane of traffic to turn yellow and then wait another 7 or 8 seconds or whatever you come up with or would you try to skip through on a yellow light?  Pretty obvious to me.  A yellow light should be timed to allow a safe stop and not add another 3 or 4 seconds or cut it a second or two either.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/comment-page-1/#comment-14305</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 13:54:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motorists.org/blog/?p=414#comment-14305</guid>
		<description>and I put &quot;there&quot; in my last post just to make your day.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>and I put &#8220;there&#8221; in my last post just to make your day.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Randy</title>
		<link>http://blog.motorists.org/ticket-cameras-used-to-convict-drivers-without-their-knowledge/comment-page-1/#comment-14304</link>
		<dc:creator>Randy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 27 Jun 2009 12:49:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.motorists.org/blog/?p=414#comment-14304</guid>
		<description>southernboy I do not see your rightings but thanks for having such a good spelling site because it sucks as a place to get facts.  There are more things exagerated and more police that are trashed on this site than is possible.  If there are a handfull of bad police out there then get rid of them but there are thousands out there that are very good but you like to trash them for doing their job.

From what your comments state you would prefer people to drive with drugs in there cars and in their bodies.  Why should the police possibly want to save your ass because as you say all should be able to drive impaired so why are police out there?  Why should they want to have people stop at stop signs or drive at a safe speed or not drive dunk or on drugs?  Why would they want to save your ass and eveyone else?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>southernboy I do not see your rightings but thanks for having such a good spelling site because it sucks as a place to get facts.  There are more things exagerated and more police that are trashed on this site than is possible.  If there are a handfull of bad police out there then get rid of them but there are thousands out there that are very good but you like to trash them for doing their job.</p>
<p>From what your comments state you would prefer people to drive with drugs in there cars and in their bodies.  Why should the police possibly want to save your ass because as you say all should be able to drive impaired so why are police out there?  Why should they want to have people stop at stop signs or drive at a safe speed or not drive dunk or on drugs?  Why would they want to save your ass and eveyone else?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
