Washington Department Of Transportation Outsources Its Disingenuous Quotes To Ticket Camera Company
May 5th, 2009 Posted in Speed Cameras
The Washington Department of Transportation has installed speed cameras on Interstate 5 in Maytown south of Olympia, Washington where road crews are working on a project. The speed limit in the work zone has been reduced from 70 to 60.
This article about the situation from KOMO TV in Seattle, Washington is interesting for two reasons:
1) Road crew safety was the reason the speed limit was lowered and the speed cameras were installed. However, the article mentions that no workers have been killed in the state for the past seven years.
2) There is a quote from a representative of the ticket camera company, American Traffic Solutions, saying that the cameras are not a moneymaker. Here’s the quote:
“It’s not a money maker,” said Michael Downing of American Traffic Solutions, a company that makes and staffs traffic cameras. “That’s not why we’re here. That’s not why they come to our company.”
That’s kind of a strange thing to say, especially coming from a company that definitely does make substantial money from ticket cameras.
It is a common quote from government officials though. I guess they decided to outsource their “it’s for safety” quotes just like they did with the enforcement of speed limits.
The average driver knows what’s going on though:
One driver, who wished only to be identified as “Peter,” is skeptical.
“I think it sounds like something that would happen in China,” he said. “The government needs the money.”
Other Related Articles
- Ticket Cameras May Be Used To Enforce Text Messaging Laws
- The Real Reason Ken Livingstone Lost
- Maryland Police Refuse To Pay Speed Camera Tickets
- How To Give Out 178,000 Traffic Tickets And Accomplish Nothing
- Short Yellow Light Times No Longer Going Unnoticed
To change the picture next to your comments, sign up at Gravatar.com. Each picture is associated with a particular email address. (This is a third-party service not affiliated with NMA.)
Ticket Cameras make me so mad. I hope i never get hit by one. That quote sounds like something Martin O’Malley would say.
If the NMA spent their time and energy convincing people to driver safer – slow down, don’t run red lights – it would be of greater value to the safe driving public. Look at the national statistics, speed and red light running are highest causes of roadway accidents. Don’t want to pay fine? Simple, driver safer – it is a voluntary fee! “Big brother” is a bogus issue – cameras are used to help identify law breakers everywhere you go; and as for the money issue, if there are some many violators that the city makes some money… bravo. It only proves the cameras were really needed.
The NMA is for the correct speed limit, which means that the yellow light timing should be appropriately long.
This equates to safety, remember flow=safety.
Speed is not a the main cause of accidents. Inattention is the primary cause of accidents, and that is a side effect of people not giving driving the respect it deserves (people really should learn some basic physical science)
Adding a mutual red time interval to intersections can increase safety (if there isn’t already one) say for a total 0.5-1 second.
The money accrued by the city and operating company is usually a result of a conflict of interest(s). The current arrangement of most speed/intersection cameras discourage remediation to the underlying problem. The payment to the operating company should be based on the reduction of violations.
and let us not forget that little line in the US Constitution about due process of law.
Mr Bill,
If you believe that red light cameras are for so called safety and the big brother concept is bogus,you my friend are a sheeple. A person who believes more goverment will keep them safe and take care of them and believe all the propaganda that is spewed on all the news outlets.
If I understand your point correctly you are against the cameras because they generate money. Of course they only bring in any funds if people speed and break the law. So you are saying: the NMA condone dangerous driving – speeding and running red lights – putting people’s lives at risk. Good government establishes prevention measures where there is potential for harm – not wait for someone to be killed as in CO last year. With your philosophy why don’t they throw in the seat belt law, use of radar, and toss the speed limit laws. I mean if we are going back to “let the public be ware,” let’s do it up right. Now that I think about it, those cameras in banks and stores are taking pictures too, let’s add them to the list!
There is a reason they are called SCAMeras
Where in the world would you think of something like
‘Good government establishes prevention measures where there is potential for harm’
That sounds like a nanny-state.
With all those millions of cameras in the UK, you’d figure that there would be no crime. Wrong!
With rights come responsibility.