The Ottermanempire.com

Dear Governor Napolitano

I’d like to take the chance to provide my views with regards to speed cameras and your comments in favor of expanding the program from Scottsdale Loop 101; on which I am a daily commuter, to statewide. The argument for these cameras appears to me, predominantly economic rather than a serious attempt at law enforcement, which is a phrase that’s telling in itself. We used to have peace officers , and still do in many of the smaller communities , which seems to be an entirely different mindset , from the type of assembly line justice that the speed cameras appear to stand for.

I’d like to draw your awareness to many cases of mistaken identity and outright fraud committed in the furtherance of such enforcement with regards to testimony from the “eyewitness” on behalf of the state that issued the tickets at Scottsdale’s behest. These include people of the wrong gender, people flying in airplanes at the time of the offense, those 40 years older and even a few with helmets while riding a motorcycle are all accompanied by a sworn statement from a representative law enforcer that can not, and should not be allowed to testify; to identify that the person in the picture is the individual cited. That those running the program can’t tell a man from a woman, Caucasian from African American, a car that can’t achieve the 147mph claimed, plus being able to see through tinted helmets suggests some oversight is required. (All reported by the Arizona Republic)

No one should have to defend themselves from the state due to the lax identification criteria and the outrageous behavior of process servers that further compounds the irony of these cameras being meant to be all about increasing adherence to the law and I would hope before an expansion of such a program that better criteria for matching drivers to cars be investigated. That those registered to L.L.C’s, PO boxes, obscured plates and those out of state have no practical way of being served, or able to defend themselves at a reasonable cost in the latter case seems to be additionally problematic when regarding the fairness of the program.

I am not saying that the speed limit is incorrect, or that there’s not an issue on 101 though I would contend that the road’s designers omitting solid center lane barriers have caused more fatal incidents rather than speed, which is obviously a factor in any accident, due to people hitting oncoming traffic.

Fatalities from rear ends ( about 23 % of accidents per NHTSA) on traffic moving roughly at the same speed account for about 3% of total fatalities opposed to the rarer , but deadlier, crossover incidents. Over time I’m not sure the recent study, as reported though I’ve not been able to locate it yet, has demonstrated the long term benefits when the program is not taken in isolation from the rest of the economic activity in the state nor for a significant reduction in fatalities. It’s also not helpful that Redflex representatives describe to their investors that “revenue stream” to their government partners is a major cause for adoption.

This alone suggests that major income for the state and their agents running the program is being pursued for marginal gains for the constituents and a loss for local businesses. Add in statements by DPS in favor of the expansion for conveniences sake and one has to ask if that speeding is as serious a hazard and must be stopped while they are too busy to deal with it? Isn’t this a rather unusual view for those that have in the past taken umbrage at speeding being classified by many of the public as not being a “real crime” and have relegated our immediate safety to a task beneath them? Sorry, if someone is doing 120 I’d like them stopped prior to a ticket 30 days after the fact.

Sincerely

 –  I didn’t cite all the sources to keep the mail  manageable but I will go back in  tonight and link these up to show you where I got the stats I claim from.