THIS RED LIGHT CAMERA THING IS NOTHING BUT PORK BARREL SPENDING AT THE EXPENSE OF LAW ABIDING TAX PAYERS AND MOTORISTS.
THIS IS NOT A SAFETY ISSUE. THIS IS NOT NY CITY. HOW MANY PEOPLE DO KNOW OF IN SUFFOLK COUNTY THAT ARE INTENTIONALLY RUNNING RED LIGHTS.
IN FACT INSURANCE CASE STUDIES SHOW THERE ARE MORE REAR END ACCIDENTS CAUSED BY MOTORISTS GETTING REAR ENDED WHEN THEY ATTEMPT TO STOP FOR THE RED LIGHT BECAUSE HTEY ARE WORRIED ABOUT GETTING A TICKET BECAUSE OF A RED LIGHT CAMERA.
WHAT THE COUNTY AND NEW YORK STATE FAIL TO REALIZE IS WHAT IF THERE IS A TRACTOR TRAILER TAIL GATING A MOTORIST AT A TIME WHEN THE LIGHT TURNS YELLOW?
WHAT CHOICE DOES THE MOTORIST HAVE? SHOULD WE RISK BEING REAR ENDED OR KILLED IN A FIREY REAR END COLLISSION BECAUSE THE COUNTY AND NY STATE NEED THE MONEY?
IN ADDITION WHO IS GOING TO PAY THE INCREASE IN AUTO INSURANCE PREMIUMS WHEN THE CAR INSURANCE COMPANIES WAKE UP AND SEE THE INCREASED RISK OF REAR END COLLISSIONS IN NASSAU AND SUFFOLK COUNTY? MAYBE THE COUNTIES SHOULD!!!!!!
THIS IS ABSURD AND I URGE MY FELLOW MOTORISTS AND TAX PAYERS TO JOIN ME IN GETTING A RESTRAINING ORDER AGAINST NEW YORK STATE AND THE COUNTY OF SUFFOLK AND NASSAU TO STOP THE COUNTIES OF NASSAU AND SUFFOLK FROM INSTALLING THESE RED LIGHT CAMERAS.
ANY PARTIES THAT WANT TO JOIN ME FEEL FREE TO CALL ME AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE ON THIS MATTER.
SINCERELY,
DAVE SHOSTACK
(631) 864-2656
New York: County Admits Cameras Are For Revenue
Categories: Industry News Off-Topic Area LIDAR / Radar Detectors
Suffolk County, New York report only mentions revenue as the reason to install red light cameras.
Strapped for cash, Suffolk County, New York admits it wants to install red light cameras to generate revenue. In a four-hundred-page review of the county's financial situation released earlier this month, officials mentioned only one purpose for the automated traffic enforcement devices.
"At this point the County needs to make hard decisions," the 2009 county budget review states. "Do we raise property taxes? Do we seek state approval to raise the overall sales tax rate? ... Do we raise revenue from traffic tickets by instituting red light cameras? ... These are some of the choices, none of which are attractive. Nevertheless, we must face reality and begin serious discussions on what direction to take."
The county cannot install red light cameras without first obtaining permission from the state legislature. Since 2001, it has been consistently frustrated in its attempts to convince lawmakers in Albany to grant this authority. Photo enforcement supporters believe that support from Governor David Patterson (D) will finally deliver the changes in state law needed to begin operations. The county has even begun taking steps to establish a parking violations bureau to handle the photo tickets.
"You know, we've been trying to get this legislation passed forever," Suffolk County Legislature Presiding Officer William Lindsay explained in a February meeting. "And this year it was put in the governor's suggested legislative package, so we're very hopeful that it will get passed... if we don't establish the Parking Violations Bureau, we don't get the revenue."
Another of the county's elected lawmakers, Kate Browning, at a September meeting pointed to the reason behind the governor's support.
"What this letter (from Governor Patterson) is saying is that we could gain $3.5 million in annual revenue from the red light camera program," Browning said.
For the past two years Suffolk County has actually included this amount in its official budget projections, expecting state lawmakers would concede to their request. This turned out to be a costly mistake.
"County Executive Tom Suozzi put it in his budget last year for revenue, it never came through," Deputy County Executive Ben Zwirn said at a September 18 meeting. "There's a hole in the budget because of that. He's put it in his budget again this year."
But not every Suffolk County official believes red light cameras are solely for revenue. County legislator William Lindsay has been one of photo enforcement's most vocal supporters. He insisted during a 2004 debate that the devices would be beneficial.
"What this bill is all about is not intruding on people's lives and taking pictures of people," Lindsay said. "The cameras take a picture of a license plate in a vehicle, not of a person. And what the issue here is about safety."
A copy of the Suffolk County 2009 budget review is available in a 1.4mb PDF file at the source link below.
Source:
Review of the 2009 Recommended Suffolk County Operating Budget (Suffolk County, New York, 10/17/2008)
Dave, you are an idiot. Your analogy means keep running lights so nobody gets rear ended? So killing someone by running a red light would be better? Again, you are an Idiot. Has the thought of slowing down ever crossed your mind?
If you rear end someone, common sense says, you are driving too fast to slow down in time, correct? When we start to look at traffic lights as safety devices again, instead of being a nuisance, driving will become much safer, in the mean while the cameras will be needed for the many reckless drivers we all encounter on a daily basis.
Drivers have become to reckless and need to be stopped period.
Do the math Dave on what Red light running accidents cost tax payers, thats right Dave its the accidents that cost us, not the cameras. Deaths, Police, Ambulance, Hospitals, Damaged infrastructure, Insurance rates and Prison costs and so on. Do you want to continue to pay for that? I know I don't.
I choose the camera; it does not cost me or any tax payer a dime! All construction cost is covered by the contractor, states and cities pay nothing. You know who the only one it will cost Dave? The reckless person running the light.
Dave this will in fact reduce auto insurance rates
, again you are an idiot. Your analogy of rear end crashes only serves to protect idiots like you who probably love to run red lights.
Next time you see a some poor soul being peeled out of a car and there parts put in a bag after a red light runner hit and killed them, ask your self , if it does not cost you a dime, wouldn't it be worth it just to save a few lives? Of course it would.
The facts stand for themselves Dave, your facts are incorrect. Tax payers will in fact benefit from cameras. Please don't try to confuse people there not as stupid as you may think.Only the guilty will be affected.Slow down and get home safely. God bless the camera's
AS A FOLLOW UP:
WHAT ABOUT THOSE COUNTIES LIKE SUFFOLK AND NASSAU THAT INTENTIONALLY PROGRAM THE YELLOW LIGHT SO THAT THERE IS NO TIME TO STOP AND YOU GET A TTCKET BECAUSE THEY NEED THE MONEY.
CASE IN POINT:
RED LIGHT CAMERA GLEN COVE RD, NASSAU COUNTY PARALLEL WITH ENTRANCE TO MEADOW BROOK PKWY, 45 MPH SPEED LIMIT, YELLOW LIGHT IS ONLY 3 SECONDS.
TRY GOING 45 MPH AND THE LIGHT TURNS YELLOW FOR 3 SECONDS, LET ME KNOW IF YOU CAN STOP BEHIND THE WHITE LINES WITHOUT GETTING A TICKET.
IT TAKES 1 SEC FOR EVERY 10 MPH SO A SPEED LIMIT OF 45 MPH REQUIRES MINIMUM OF 4.5-5.0 SECONDS TO STOP SAFELY BEHIND THE WHITE LINES WITHOUT GETTING A TICKET.
RSS