Springfield official defends red light cameras in Senate hearing
Feb 18, 2009 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: Springfield News Leader
JEFFERSON CITY - A Springfield official defended the city's red light camera system in a Senate hearing this morning, opposing a bill that would ban the devices for enforcing traffic violations.
I am 100% for the red lights. Only those who would be criminally minded would oppose them because they may practice running red lights. People have forgotten that yellow lights mean slow down and be prepared to stop. NOT speed up and beat the light.
As a good driver, I actually thought that it wouldn't affect me until I immediately noticed that the yellow light seemed to be a considerable amount shorter. At first I thought that it just wasn't possible that the yellow lights were actually shortened on purpose... so I just typed it into google and found that even MSNBC took notice of these same issues with Springfield, MO specifically!
I was not aware of all of the issues. Thanks for the great post!
Red light cameras are 'revenue builders'.
They are 'sold' to city officials on that basis by the companies that make/install the equipment.
If YOU think they are put in place for the 'public safety' aspect,
...well, then I have some ocean front property in Kansas you may also be interested in.
Im 100% for David Shafer and friends to kiss my ripe ole anuzz !!!
|MO Who do you support for U.S. Senate in Missouri ... (Oct '10)||39 min||Brain Dead Liberals||85,559|
|MO Missouri's Prop C: Voters Set to Challenge Heal... (Aug '10)||2 hr||Oh my god||18,644|
|MO Who do you support for Auditor in Missouri in 2... (Oct '10)||Dec 4||White Rabbit||198|
|Review: Glodgett's Auto||Nov 27||Anon||1|
|henry county||Nov 14||Legion1956||1|
|Missouri lawmaker convicted in escape of cattle||Nov 11||Hay||1|
|MO Missouri Proposition B: The Puppy Mill Bill (Oct '10)||Oct '13||Jim||6,770|