Fight Speeding Ticket

National Motorists Association Blog

When The Money Disappears, So Do The Ticket Cameras

Posted on February 18th, 2008 in | 47 Comments

The Daily World in Aberdeen, Washington on January 24, 2008:

“If you don’t want a ticket, don’t run a red light,” said Councilwoman Margo Shortt, who felt safety should trump everything else and the red light cameras would prevent accidents.

“We need to try this to see if it works,” said Councilman Bob McCullough. “The key issue in all this is traffic safety.”

From The Daily World in Aberdeen, Washington on February 16, 2008:

Mayor Bill Simpson will hold off on plans to put red light cameras in Aberdeen intersections in the wake of an initiative Tim Eyman is proposing to reduce traffic congestion.


Eyman has proposed an initiative that could take any revenue the city would receive from the tickets the cameras would generate and put it into a special account to help reduce traffic congestion statewide.

“That’s not really what we were expecting when we got into all of this,” Simpson said.


Eyman’s initiative aims to reduce congestion by opening up carpool lanes to all vehicles in non-peak hours, requires traffic signals to be synchronized and insists accidents be cleared from roadways quicker.

But remember, the key issue in all this is traffic safety.

Not an NMA member yet?   Join today and get these great benefits!

Leave a Comment

47 Responses to “When The Money Disappears, So Do The Ticket Cameras”

  1. Richard Fleer says:

    In Chicago, I see the left turn arrow purposefully shortened to make money off of people turning left on a light that will turn red in about 10 seconds from when it was green. According to the rules of the road you need to wait untill all traffic going straight and turning right clears the intersection. So the left turn arrow runs only two seconds. We have to turn left by reacting to it like we’re Don Prudhomme.

  2. John Hagland Jr. says:

    You want to make money?
    Intersection with the red light camera for the lelf turn, are fine. What about the Intersection with the sings that says “No turn on red” and people still making the right turns on red, Well take there picture and send them ticket too.

  3. […] with more and more poor ticket camera results becoming public, most people have figured out the true purpose of the cameras by now […]

  4. j says:

    ** “… to help reduce traffic congestion statewide.” Yep…that’s what they told the people in England too. Then they started using the “License Plate Recognition” software and Vwalla! Instant Nanny State. You’ve got cameras with loudspeakers on them and the cops yell at you when you get to close to the sides of a crosswalk. They peak in your windows at all hours of the day and night, so you draw the curtains. You walk down the street and they have facial recognition software and keep records of all your friends; where you go, what you buy, how long you stay in the shops, who you meet, etc. ***So when they say it’s simply for Traffic Congestion or Safety, you tell them you don’t want it. And if they put it up anyway, give it back to them. Everytime they drain the canal they can have it back. Don’t trust a damned word they say. Their track record for telling the truth, for the lack of a better word…..SUCKS!! Have a great day America :-)

  5. Annet says:

    By means of I have found another study with some news in it. According to is, nothing is going to change for the better for ordinary drivers…

  6. Ironman says:

    Well what I have done since the camera lights, is simply change my driving habits, I have not got a camera light ticket yet, my son has and that’s when I changed my habits.
    I now drive as close to the posted speed limit as I can, I’ll slam my breaks to stop on a yellow light, camera light or not, it took a little getting use to and it mostly annoys other drivers but who cares, I try to shop in areas where I don’t have to pass by a camera light. So change your driving habits because the police have been letting everything go like speeding, reckless driving and many others. In my state there are billboards stating slow down drive the speed limit or you will be ticketed. In these hard times the city’s will be looking for more ways to get money,
    Change your habits and hope for the best and always stop on yellow even if it kills you.

    • jimpeel says:

      It very well may kill you. This thread is rife with examples of how rear-end accidents escalate after the implementation of red light cameras. I hope you don’t drive a Pinto.

  7. jimpeel says:

    Officer Josh,

    “They drastically have been proven in baltimore city to raise crime solving.”

    Have they actually solved any crimes; or are crimes down in those areas because the criminal element simply moved to where there are no cameras? This is what happened in Britain.

    It also happened in Los angeles but not due to cameras. Real police work started cracking down on the Crips and Bloods there and crime fell drastically. However, crime escalated in Omaha because that is where they migrated to avoid the L.A. crackdown.

    Crime never goes away. It merely moves around.

    • j says:

      Crime is like Energy; you can’t get ride of it. It simply changes form. And sometimes, those who are doing the crimewatching are the criminals themselves. It all depends which laws are being broken and who’s paying enough attention to it all. I really don’t think cameras in the streets were put there to keep crime down at all. It think it’s just more of the same “Keep an eye on them” type mentality that’s taking over America. I believe that if all the people were to go out into the streets and rip the ugly bastards down and drag them and drop them infront of their nearest police station and walk away, they would not put them back up. We paid for them right? Well, tell them to recycle them into Badges and put the Beat Cop back on The Beat where he belongs. Sorry…. sometimes the truth just jumps up and bites you on the gouche. It sucks…get over it. Have a great day America :-)

  8. Officer Josh says:


    I absolutely agree that red light camera’s are a bad idea. I’m talking about city camera’s not on red lights but on city blocks in problem area’s. They drastically have been proven in baltimore city to raise crime solving.

  9. jimpeel says:

    Officer Josh,

    The problem is creeping escalation in the use of the cameras, which were supposedly placed for nothing more than traffic control, and which would “never be used as a crime control measure”. Recently, there was a picture of two men in a stolen car on the front page of the local newspaper. The picture was taken by — drumroll please — a red light camera. With increased use comes increased abuse as those in Britain have found out.

    The biggest problem with the red light cameras at intersections is the inherent increase in rear-end accidents which accompany them. I have posted numerous articles and sources here on that fact. In many cities, they have taken them down as a safety factor.

    Then there are those cities, such as Fort Collins, CO, which I also cited, which claimed early on that the cameras were for safety reasons, not revenue enhancement. Then the state set the maximum fine for red light camera citations to $25 and the city cried “Foul”. It seems that they were concerned that they would barely break even on the cameras. It seems that the $15 they lost (they were charging $40 fines) was for, you guessed it, revenue enhancement.

    The cameras are simply another hidden tax on the people of the cities in which they are installed. Most people will simply pay the fine, sent to them by mail from a faceless bureaucrat, alleging that they were spotted, by an entity they cannot interrogate at trial, committing some offense. No matter what they do, pay or fight, they keep those bureaucrats in their jobs doing what they do best — screwing their fellow citizens and living the lie.

  10. Officer Josh says:

    Jim peel,

    I read the article you provided and I absolutely agree that a system such as “big brother” needs to be closely monitored and controlled. However I dont see the real problem with it. Also, England has very different laws and the judicial system works differently too. When Baltimore City installed camera’s in troubled blocks around the city, the citizens of the area embraced them. They are still lobbying for more camera’s in other area’s because they have worked so well.

    • j says:

      **They are still lobbying for more camera’s in other area’s because they have worked so well.** Be careful what you wish for. You just might get it. If you want to see what happens when “Big Brother” gets done … Youtube “Cameras in England”. You’ll wish you never allowed the bastards in your street or neighborhood. Like I said, Be careful what you wish for.

  11. jimpeel says:

    Officer Josh,

    So how about this. I’m sure DPP chief Sir Ken Macdonald is not “committing crimes” yet he has concerns about surveillance technology.

    From the story:

    (begin)The Director of Public Prosecutions has given a warning of the dangers of plans for a massive expansion of “Big Brother” state surveillance and of the growth of a “security state”.

    Sir Ken Macdonald, who heads the Crown Prosecution Service, said that the “enormous powers of access to information” that technology had given the state should be used with great care.

    He told an audience in London last night: “We need to take very great care not to fall into a way of life in which freedom’s back is broken by the relentless pressure of a security state.”


  12. Officer Josh says:


    I’m still not understanding what your “actual” concern is here? What do you care if there is a camera outside in the park while your walking around? Are you committing crimes? Is that why you want them gone? I can understand traffic or “red light” cameras, there garbage and easily beat in court, but street camera’s? What about the camera in the store when you go to 7/11 to get some food? Are you against those? I just dont see the problem, this isnt England and we dont rely on the camera’s we just have them to help.

  13. jimpeel says:

    “Just last year they have solved 30% more murders, robberies and assults because of those cameras.” — Officer Josh

    When cities first started installing the traffic cameras they were challenged that this was nothing more than their spying on the public. The authorities stated that the cameras were strictly for traffic control and would never be used as a crime fighting tool or to spy on the unsuspecting public.

    The truth will always out. All it takes is some time.

    Look at the cameras in Britain where a citizen is never out of range of a camera. They are under constant surveillance. They have even been told that large headgear is frowned upon if it shields the face of the common citizen.

    Read these articles and see what those there go through.



  14. Officer Josh says:


    How are “corner cams” intrusive? There openly in the public and therefore not intrusive. I’ve been to little rock and in N. little rock they really do need them. We have them here in Baltimore there easy to see cuz they have a bright flashing blue light on top of them. Just last year they have solved 30% more murders, robberies and assults because of those cameras. If its in public it is not intrusive, if its in your home, it is.

  15. Jim Peel says:

    “I’m suprised that someone hasn’t invented a devise to circumvent the camera …”

    They have.

    There is a spray and there are several overlay shields available.

  16. Ken says:

    I’m suprised that someone hasn’t invented a devise to circumvent the camera,maybe a laser beam or electronic signal to cancel out the electronics. Remember back in the C.B. radio craze people had outrageous high output linear “kickers” that just about blocked out all transmissions when they keyed the mic.

  17. steve says:

    Great News. Nestor, a maker of speed cameras, got delisted on the stock exchange today. Stock once worth $48 is now worth 21 cents. I am glad anybody who invested in Nestor lost money.

  18. Yates says:

    what about cities like downtown north little rock, ar which have used recent federal grants for intrusive surveillance measures? i.e., corner cams and remote helicopters w/ multiple cam attaches and crazy deep pockets? Don’t forget to wave!

Join National Motorists Association

© National Motorists Association