Dont' get mad at the police...

[dimethylsea]

GET EVEN!

http://www.switched.com/2010/06/09/man-avenges-speeding-ticket-by-buying-expired-police-department/

"When Brian McCrary got ticketed for speeding in Bluff City, Tennessee, he got mad -- but he also got even. Upset because he was caught by a police speed camera placed on U.S. Highway 11E, McCrary decided to go to the Bluff City Police Department's Web site to ask a question about his $90 fine. While there, he noticed that the site's domain name was about to expire. Opportunist that he apparently is, McCrary decided to buy it up for himself, officially securing his place in the pantheon of online vengeance.

Now, as the owner of http://www.bluffcitypd.com, McCrary uses the forum to post links and complaints about speed cameras. And, it appears that he's found a pretty substantial fan base, as the site has already accrued over 1,200 unique hits since he took the reins on May 22nd. "It's kind of surprising that they'd just let it lapse like that," the new domain owner told TriCities.com. "I figured they would be aware [it was about to expire] and renew it on their own."


Ultimately, the police department has only itself to blame for allowing the domain to slip from its hands. GoDaddy.com, the company that administered rights to the name, sent a series of warning e-mails to the office to warn them that the domain was about to expire, and then several more even after it had already expired. Bluff City Police Chief David Nelson, however, says, "It just slipped my mind. If you open up a Web site and let it go down, somebody can buy it – I did not know that."

McCrary's bold payback, however, didn't come for free. He had to pay an extra $80 for the rights, in addition, of course, to his speeding fine. But the feedback he's received thus far has been so overwhelming, he's confident that "this camera thing will come to an end." [From: TriCities.com and TGDaily]

[Drake]

So... what did he accomplish except doubling his fine for breaking the law? Speeding gets people killed. You can download apps to find speed cameras... he wasted his money

[dimethylsea]

Sorry Drake, but it's not "doubling the fine" unless he was MADE to pay twice the amount.

He got a chance to state his opinion, and encourage others to do the same, and managed to rub the Popo's incompetence in their face. And his minimal investment will KEEP doing that.. unlike trying to organize a protest in front of the police station or something.

Those cameras are put in by private companies who pay the municipality a fee for the privilege of using the power of law to charge people money.

That's as abhorrent to me as privatizing prisons. Sadly TN, being full of ignorant religious conservatives is very fond of this kind of crap. Corrections Corporate on America was HQed here (may still be) IIRC.

[1bad65]

So... what did he accomplish except doubling his fine for breaking the law? Speeding gets people killed. You can download apps to find speed cameras... he wasted his money

Speeding alone has never caused an accident. At least one other traffic law must be broken for an accident to occur.

[Drake]

Speeding alone has never caused an accident. At least one other traffic law must be broken for an accident to occur.

What are you talking about? Of course it has. Going too fast dramatically reduces your reaction time, affects your braking distance, and is another form of reckless driving.

If you can't stop in time because you are going too fast....speeding just caused the accident. Happens EVERY DAY out here in Colorado Springs. People driving too fast, can't stop, wreck ensues.

Did you even think about this before posting?

[Drake]

And technically speaking, speed cameras are meant to be a deterrent, not a way of raising money. If everyone knows it is there, they'll obey the law. Every now and then some moron might forget it's there and get zapped, but on the by and large, it is meant to make people aware of their speed.

Dim... I know in Europe they have to have signs up notifying people of speed cameras in the area... do you know if that stretch of road had something similar?


I'm also kind of mixed about outside contracts for the cameras. I mean, the police department can't make the cameras themselves, naturally, and by using a civilian company, it stimulates economic growth... but you have to wonder how the contracts are decided.

[1bad65]

What are you talking about? Of course it has. Going too fast dramatically reduces your reaction time, affects your braking distance, and is another form of reckless driving.

If you can't stop in time because you are going too fast....speeding just caused the accident. Happens EVERY DAY out here in Colorado Springs. People driving too fast, can't stop, wreck ensues.

Did you even think about this before posting?

Of course I thought about it, and I'm correct.

The examples you mentioned have other traffic laws being broken, failure to maintain a safe speed and failure to maintain a safe distance.

If I'm going 45 in a 55 and I rear end someone, speeding had nothing to do with the accident.

I've been driving for over 20 years now and in that time I bet I've gotten a good 20 or so speeding tickets. Not once have I had an accident that was my fault. Speed alone does not cause accidents.

[1bad65]

And technically speaking, speed cameras are meant to be a deterrent, not a way of raising money. If everyone knows it is there, they'll obey the law. Every now and then some moron might forget it's there and get zapped, but on the by and large, it is meant to make people aware of their speed.

If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you.

Several of them have been flat-out busted shortening the yellow lights in order to generate revenue.

Sources:
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/16/1621.asp
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/22/2269.asp

Link with stories of 6 more cities caught:
http://blog.motorists.org/6-cities-that-were-caught-shortening-yellow-light-times-for-profit/

[Drake]

Of course I thought about it, and I'm correct.

The examples you mentioned have other traffic laws being broken, failure to maintain a safe speed and failure to maintain a safe distance.

If I'm going 45 in a 55 and I rear end someone, speeding had nothing to do with the accident.

I've been driving for over 20 years now and in that time I bet I've gotten a good 20 or so speeding tickets. Not once have I had an accident that was my fault. Speed alone does not cause accidents.

Whatever. You are avoiding the fact that speed does cause accidents. I'd guess that given your track record, you probably won't change your opinion until someone gets killed.

If you are going 95 in a 45 and hit someone pulling out, then speed caused that accident. Zero reaction time, inability to brake in time. Yeah... that's a speeding accident.

[1bad65]

Whatever. You are avoiding the fact that speed does cause accidents.

Speed can be a contributing factor, but it ALONE cannot cause an accident.

[1bad65]

If you are going 95 in a 45 and hit someone pulling out, then speed caused that accident. Zero reaction time, inability to brake in time. Yeah... that's a speeding accident.

What if in that scenario, I'm going 46. Who is at fault? ;)

[Drake]

What if in that scenario, I'm going 46. Who is at fault? ;)

You are.
....

[1bad65]

You are.
....

Not legally. Read the laws about entering an intersection, pulling onto one street from another, and those concerning stop signs.

[1bad65]

You are.
....

Tell you what, can you show me ONE accident report where "Speeding" was listed as the SOLE cause of an accident?

[dimethylsea]

Dim... I know in Europe they have to have signs up notifying people of speed cameras in the area... do you know if that stretch of road had something similar?


I'm also kind of mixed about outside contracts for the cameras. I mean, the police department can't make the cameras themselves, naturally, and by using a civilian company, it stimulates economic growth... but you have to wonder how the contracts are decided.

Drake,
Knowing Tennessee as I do, I love it (it's home), I hate it (it's home), etc. my personal guess would be that warning signs would lower the local police departments revenue.
I did some digging and found this..
"Mumpower and Hill described the Bluff City cameras as collecting $250,000 per month from unwary motorists on a four-lane straightaway section of U.S. 11E, where the speed limit is 55 mph except for a 100-yard stretch on either side of the cameras."

Typical speeds on state 4-lane (2 each way) highways outside municipal limits is 55 (and most people do 60-65 with the flow if there is any flow).

I'd guess that since its a speed trap of sorts the signs are not exactly there as a deterrent. This thing is pretty much a straight up revenue generator.

There is actually a decent possibility the cameras might be banned or restricted by state law so I guess the fellow's website hijinks have helped create some "grass-roots" reaction eh?

I'd double my fine if it helped strike the law I was found guilty of breaking.

[Drake]

See... what they SHOULD do (if they are really trying to enfocre the law, not collect revenue) is do as they do in Germany. You drive into an area, and you see this sign with a picture of a camera and a warning (even if you speak no Deutsch, you can easily figure out what it means). So, what happens? Everyone slows down there, obeys the speed limits, and the area is safer. Every great now and then someone gets flashed.

Also, they tend to put these cameras in residentials areas and areas of the autobahn where staus (traffic jams) frequently occurs. That keeps that Audi from barreling into a stopped car at 150mph. I haven't seen any cameras in the US yet, but the ones in Europe always had a set prupose and were there for the safety of the people.

[Drake]

Tell you what, can you show me ONE accident report where "Speeding" was listed as the SOLE cause of an accident?

Hmm...let me check my global criminal record files. Oh, wait...I don't have any.

[1bad65]

Hmm...let me check my global criminal record files. Oh, wait...I don't have any.

Even if you had those files, you would not be able to find one example.

Look, I've had and been in my share of accidents, and not one has been my fault. So i've seen my share of accident reports. Not one has "Speeding" listed as the SOLE cause. As a matter of fact, officers cannot even ticket someone for speeding after a wreck (unless they witnessed the speeding firsthand). They have to ticket people for things like; illegally entering an intesection, failure to control speed, following too closely, running a red light, etc.

[Drake]

Even if you had those files, you would not be able to find one example.

Look, I've had and been in my share of accidents, and not one has been my fault. So i've seen my share of accident reports. Not one has "Speeding" listed as the SOLE cause. As a matter of fact, officers cannot even ticket someone for speeding after a wreck (unless they witnessed the speeding firsthand). They have to ticket people for things like; illegally entering an intesection, failure to control speed, following too closely, running a red light, etc.

Because legally they didn't get the speed. How in the heck can you say speeding doesn't cause accidents simply because they didn't radar gun the guy before he plowed into a car due to zero reaction time? This is a stupid argument. I mean, REAL stupid. You can't say that speeding somehoiw isn't the fault, even though BASIC LAWS OF PHYSICS show that reaction time is dramatically reduced. You are arguing with motherf$%^&ing laws of physics.

Arguing on this forum is frustrating.

[dimethylsea]

See... what they SHOULD do (if they are really trying to enfocre the law, not collect revenue) is do as they do in Germany. You drive into an area, and you see this sign with a picture of a camera and a warning (even if you speak no Deutsch, you can easily figure out what it means). So, what happens? Everyone slows down there, obeys the speed limits, and the area is safer. Every great now and then someone gets flashed.

Also, they tend to put these cameras in residentials areas and areas of the autobahn where staus (traffic jams) frequently occurs. That keeps that Audi from barreling into a stopped car at 150mph. I haven't seen any cameras in the US yet, but the ones in Europe always had a set prupose and were there for the safety of the people.

Yeah... Americans don't like taxes but have alot less problems with fines for "wrong doing". So this makes the traffic cameras (and especially shortening the yellow light times) attractive to municipalities.

They get extra revenue and don't have to ask for more money on the property tax or any city sales tax.

It is worth mentioning that this sort of "end run" around classical funding mechanisms for law enforcement is ALSO manifested in the seizure laws where cops legally steal from suspected (not yet convicted, maybe not ever convicted) criminals and use the cars, proceeds from the guns, and cash to fund their own operations.

This is one reason why I am so unreasonable about police. I had a buddy, I knew him well, he was scared of getting caught dealing, so he never sold ever.
He was trying to keep his money right and bought an oz. of smoke and was taking it home. Cop pulls him over, all his papers were in order. Cop wants to search the car, he declines permission, cop pulls him out of the car, cuffs him, roughs him up then calls in the K-9. Dope is found, they impound the car, and take him to jail.

When all the dust finally settled the cop was reprimanded verbally by the judge for inproper behavior, the search was declared invalid (the cop had no reason to stop him and no reason to search) and the cops previous record of violations was brought before the court by my buddy's counsel.

But they seized his car and sold it at auction.

No convictions, no criminal record, and they put him out of work for 3 months and stole his Mustang.

You know what the joke is? He was so furious at the cops... he single-handedly turned their entire jurisdiction into a free for all.

They turned a cautious, careful, quiet weed smoker into one of the most high volume dealers in town. He's not doing it for the money.. he's doing it for payback.

My personal suspicion is one of these days one of those cops is going to do something even more aggro to "get back" at this guy.. and then some rural podunk cops are going to have to start wearing Kevlar *everywhere*..

I seldom visit that area. It's a powderkeg waiting for a spark.

Traffic cameras for revenue generation are not as bad as forfeiture laws.. but it's the same principle.

Eliminate due process in practical terms, and profit from those the law can bully.

[1bad65]

How in the heck can you say speeding doesn't cause accidents simply because they didn't radar gun the guy before he plowed into a car due to zero reaction time?

I never said that, thats how.

I said speeding has never been the SOLE cause of any traffic accident.

[1bad65]

Dime,

your story is sad. The way to fix it...vote Libertarian. Seizing cars like that is a clear violation of the 5th Amendment. But we have been electing people with no knowledge of, and who frankly don't care about, the Constitution.

When the police actually profit because of criminal activity, what incentive do they have to clean it up?

[Drake]

Dime,

your story is sad. The way to fix it...vote Libertarian. Seizing cars like that is a clear violation of the 5th Amendment. But we have been electing people with no knowledge of, and who frankly don't care about, the Constitution.

When the police actually profit because of criminal activity, what incentive do they have to clean it up?

Seizures have been going on at LEAST since Pres. Bush v1.0

[1bad65]

Seizures have been going on at LEAST since Pres. Bush v1.0

I don't care who started doing them, I said they were unconsitutional. And my point was that the Libertarians are the best Party to vote for if you are a believer in the Constitution and you want to get rid of laws like this.

OT, but FYI, the Bushes are not exactly great at following the Constitution. Remember Campaign Finance Reform? That one was in direct conflict with the 1st Amendment, thankfully the Supreme Court got that one right.