Let's face it; this Mayor has no respect for the police department or programs they support. The cameras are an easy political target. It seems the most important question should be "have they worked?” We have had the cameras for several years, so: "Are the violation, crashes, and injuries down?" Let the results speak for themselves. The Mayor certainly has this data, but never seems to mentions it!
There is a lot of dialog, but no facts. Did the camera programs work? Did they make the community any safer? Were accidents down? Did violations drop? I would like the paper to look deeper into the program rather than just reporting what the new anti-PD Mayor thinks.
The fact that people don't like getting a ticket or having their driving behavior hampered, doesn't make running a red light or speeding any less dangerous. It is illegal and shouldn't be encouraged…especially by our community leaders - it's bad form and embarrassing for the city.
The anger expressed by many of the responders is why we need the cameras. It is that same lack of emotional control that is found in aggressive and dangerous driving. Only a person who resents any restriction on their personal driving behavior would make such inane statements. The results speak for themselves – when cameras go up; accidents go down. That’s why they are supported by every governmental organization involved with traffic safety. If you are a safe driver and don't break the law, no problem and no bucks from you.
Just another couple of broke attorneys looking for an angle to protect the guilty and exploit the innocent. Forget that the people who got the tickets broke the law and put others in harms way. Ignore the drop in violations since the cameras were installed; disregard the reduced crashes; and certainly don’t bring up the injuries that have been avoided in both cities. The data is clear, the programs are working. They couldn’t care less that their clients were guilty and got caught, but are looking for a legal loop hole to get tem off and cost the taxpayers big bucks (to the lawyers). The time, effort and money would be better spent in convincing people to drive safer: don't break the law, don't run red lights or speed, and you won’t have an issue.
All the states mentioned in the article plus some 20 more have photo enforcement programs. Interesting that the implementation of these programs, that have doubled in the past 3 years, got no mention!
Neither the complainers about the cameras or the legislature mention the safety issue. They all nit-pick on trivia! Accidents are down almost 20% - I guess that only has value if it is you or one of your loved ones. Is it so difficult to drive safely and obey the law...I assume by the gripes that it must be.
Red Bank to keep cameras for now
Let's face it; this Mayor has no respect for the police department or programs they support. The cameras are an easy political target. It seems the most important question should be "have they worked?” We have had the cameras for several years, so: "Are the violation, crashes, and injuries down?" Let the results speak for themselves. The Mayor certainly has this data, but never seems to mentions it!
Red Bank stalls on traffic cameras
There is a lot of dialog, but no facts. Did the camera programs work? Did they make the community any safer? Were accidents down? Did violations drop? I would like the paper to look deeper into the program rather than just reporting what the new anti-PD Mayor thinks.
Red Bank leaders divided on cameras
The fact that people don't like getting a ticket or having their driving behavior hampered, doesn't make running a red light or speeding any less dangerous. It is illegal and shouldn't be encouraged…especially by our community leaders - it's bad form and embarrassing for the city.
Traffic camera lawsuit dismissed
The anger expressed by many of the responders is why we need the cameras. It is that same lack of emotional control that is found in aggressive and dangerous driving. Only a person who resents any restriction on their personal driving behavior would make such inane statements. The results speak for themselves – when cameras go up; accidents go down. That’s why they are supported by every governmental organization involved with traffic safety. If you are a safe driver and don't break the law, no problem and no bucks from you.
Residents file class-action traffic camera suit
Just another couple of broke attorneys looking for an angle to protect the guilty and exploit the innocent. Forget that the people who got the tickets broke the law and put others in harms way. Ignore the drop in violations since the cameras were installed; disregard the reduced crashes; and certainly don’t bring up the injuries that have been avoided in both cities. The data is clear, the programs are working. They couldn’t care less that their clients were guilty and got caught, but are looking for a legal loop hole to get tem off and cost the taxpayers big bucks (to the lawyers). The time, effort and money would be better spent in convincing people to drive safer: don't break the law, don't run red lights or speed, and you won’t have an issue.
Traffic fatalities falling fast
All the states mentioned in the article plus some 20 more have photo enforcement programs. Interesting that the implementation of these programs, that have doubled in the past 3 years, got no mention!
Red Bank mayor defends traffic cameras
Neither the complainers about the cameras or the legislature mention the safety issue. They all nit-pick on trivia! Accidents are down almost 20% - I guess that only has value if it is you or one of your loved ones. Is it so difficult to drive safely and obey the law...I assume by the gripes that it must be.