Kaye Beach

20 Reasons to Oppose Photo Radar-CameraFRAUD

In Uncategorized on January 6, 2010 at 4:42 am

20 Reasons to Oppose Photo Radar

Thanks goes to CameraFRAUD.com !

1. Encourages Criminal Activity

Outsourcing of law enforcement is a breeding ground for corruption. The incentive to rob people is in the profits the tickets generate. Kickbacks and offers of high paying jobs with photo radar companies are being reported here and in other countries.

Cities, including Paradise Valley, Dallas, Lubbock, Baytown, Beaverton, Union City, Springfield, and Chattanooga, have all been caught shortening yellow lights to increase profits from red light cameras. Bethesda left a yellow light at a photo radar intersection  at 2.7 seconds for a year after the public complained, even though every other yellow light on the street was 4 seconds.

The reason why short yellow lights create a trap for people driving is that short yellow lights create an “impossible to stop” zone in which a certain percentage of people approaching an intersection become caught in the dilemma of not being able to stop safely before the light turns red, and not being able to cross into the intersection without technically running a red light.






In Italy, a speed camera company was caught in a fraud scandal that involved 109 officials and contractors.  Italian police found 81,555 speed camera tickets worth $16 million were fraudulently issued. Prosecutors believe that some of these cameras were calibrated in such a way that motorists adhering to the speed limit would receive citations. Photo radar units bearing the same individual serial number were also being used by different municipalities located hundreds of miles apart. Thus preventing proper calibration testing requirements. As a result, $16 million fraudulently issued tickets, between 2007 and 2009, have been cancelled, refunds will be given and license points will be removed.

In January, the makers of the T-Red brand of red light cameras were similarly arrested for fraud after prosecutors found motorists were being trapped at intersections with short yellows and improperly certified equipment


Based out of Phoenix, Australian corporation Redflex violated federal law by using radar units that were not FCC certified.

In 2008,  Arizona Secretary of State Jan Brewer confirmed that  Redflex documents used to convict motorists of speeding in Lafayette, Louisiana contained elements that had been falsified. Four Arizona laws were violated while purporting to certify a speed camera deployment form for use in official hearings. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/24/2464.asp

In June, Christopher Everette Jacobs, a Redflex employee in Longview, Texas was indicted on nine counts, including three of aggravated sexual assault, four of sexual performance by a child and two of possession or promotion of child pornography.

The case against Jacobs began after sheriff’s office investigators received a complaint from a woman that a neighbor had been taking pictures of her 8-year-old daughter.

Redflex employee, Roderick Ruffin, was arrested in Scottsdale for “extreme DUI” while driving an automated ticketing van .

Another driver was accused of aggravated assault and found guilty of driving at a speed greater than reasonable and had his license suspended.

These are some of the criminals that Redflex has hired that can access your DMV records and can find out where you live.

Arizona Sheriff Babeu says, “It’s driven to create money for the government. It’s corrupting law enforcement for us to be partnered with a private entity that creates revenue – clearly that’s their interest.”

2. Hurts Local Businesses and Tourism

Hundreds of millions of American dollars have been funneled to Redflex (with its Australian shareholders), photo enforcement companies, and stagnant local governments. This is money that would have been spent at local businesses.

The 2005 Redflex Investor briefing estimated the market for mobile units in U.S. school zones and roads to be $4 to 10 Billion. The potential red light enforcement market:

350,000 signalized intersections

Average potential 4 directions within each =1,400,000
directions of travel

1/20 to 1/40 enforced = 35,000 to 70,000 approaches

$ 2.1 to 4.2 Billion potential


Speed and red light cameras brought in $52 million in fines in Montgomery County and the District (Fiscal Year 2009), according to AAA.

Washington, DC collected a total of $40.5 million – $33,377,810 was in speed camera ticket revenue and $7,153,622 in revenue from its red-light camera program

Montgomery County Fiscal Year 2009: collected $18.6 million in speed camera revenue.


Revenue for Redflex increased from $88.2 million (2008) to $130.9 million (2009), a 48% increase per Redflex 2009 annual report.

Consumers Avoid Areas With The Cameras

Residents of Heath, Ohio and surrounding areas responded to photo enforcement by boycotting local businesses and eventually voting out photo enforcement and the city council members responsible for the implementation of it. You can read their responses to the cameras at the link below:


Duane Goodwin, who helped put the referendum on the city ballot, cited Redflex traffic counts that showed 58,754 fewer automobiles had traveled on camera-monitored roads — a 27 percent decrease in traffic — as a result of out-of-town motorists avoiding the cameras by shopping elsewhere.

“Our little town revolves around business,” Goodwin said. “It’s a crushing blow.”

A survey of six national chain stores that operate in Heath as well as nearby Lancaster and Zanesville showed that Heath sales were off nearly 14 percent compared to a 2 to 3 percent drop in the other cities.


The city of Schaumburg, Illinois found itself in hot water when locals and out of towners vowed to stop shopping at the Woodfield Mall unless the right turn camera was turned off. The village stopped monitoring right turns at the intersection in January.


Loma Linda, California Councilman Rhodes “Dusty” Rigsby urged his fellow council members this past week to cancel the city’s contract with Red flex Traffic Systems. He said the $450 fines imposed on violators since the cameras were installed in January 2006 have generated $12 million in revenue for the courts and the city, “Is $12 million drained out of the economy of Loma Linda and our visitors worth the aggregate accident reductions that we saw?”

Councilman Ovidiu Popescu echoed Rigsby’s sentiments

“I have heard it over and over again: ‘I no longer like coming to Loma Linda because of the red-light cameras,’ ” Popescu said. “There are people who stopped going to the doctor in Loma Linda because of red-light cameras. There are people who avoid certain streets and go to other streets, cause more problems, because of red-light cameras.”


In Washington, DC,  $40.5 million was collected for photo enforcement tickets in the fiscal Year 2009:


Phoenix, Arizona is already known for its high tax rate on rental cars. Now, for the first time, AAA has designated the entire state of Arizona as a strict enforcement area, not very welcoming indeed. Think the cameras aren’t hurting your local businesses – think again

3. Endangers Drivers

Driving conditions on freeways are made especially dangerous in rainy weather; morning and evening sun glare as drivers react to the cameras by slamming on their brakes.

Accident rates across the country are increasing with the use of photo enforcement:

Baytown, Texas

Accidents rose after the installation of a red light camera at one major intersection in Baytown, Texas. Accident reports from all three monitored approaches of the Garth and Baker intersection from eighteen months before the installation of cameras compared to the same period afterward show an 11% increase in accidents.

Although proponents of cameras frequently suggest that the increase in rear end collisions (31 percent in this case) is offset by the reduction in “more serious” collisions, the data show, to the contrary, that there was no reduction at all in the number of serious injury accidents.

Total accidents, red light violation accidents, and rear end accidents all went up.




Temple Terrace, Florida

According to the Temple Terrace Police, the number of accidents at intersections with red light cameras from when they first went operational October 2008 through February of this year were up 133 % compared to the previous year when there were no cameras.

Chief of Police Kenneth Albano says “We did show an increase in the number of crashes.”




At intersections with cameras, the number of accidents more than doubled from six to fourteen. Contrary to claims that red light cameras decrease accident severity, the average police estimate of damage costs for each accident increased by twenty percent after cameras were installed. (11/7/09)


Grand Prairie, Canada

Accidents increased significantly at intersections equipped with red light cameras in Grande Prairie, Canada according to a city report completed last month. The review found that after a full year of use, cameras generated $1.2 million in revenue along with a 126 percent increase in injury collisions.

Location Before After Change
100 St at 132 Ave 4 16 +300%
100 St at 116 Ave 7.5 9 +20%
100 St at 100 Ave 4 10 +150%
100 St at 99 Ave 4 6 +50%
100 St at 84 Ave 3.5 4 +14%
116 St at 100 Ave 3 6 +100%
108 St at 100 Ave 4.5 18 +300%
Total 30.5 69 +126%



The number of injury collisions at Grande Prairie’s seven red-light camera intersections is considerably higher than average since the system went active, according to Enforcement Services’ Year 1 report on the initiative.

Between June 2008 and June this year, there were 2,963 vehicle collisions in the city; 338 involved injuries and about 20% were at red-light camera locations.

Since 2005, collisions within the city are up 43% overall.

At the time the report was compiled, there were 18 collisions involving injuries at 108 Street (Wapiti Road) and 100 Avenue, up from an average of 4.5 between 2001 and 2005. This intersection saw the most significant increase.

100 Street and 132 Avenue saw 16, up from four; city-center’s 100 Street and 100 Avenue saw 10, up from four; 100 Street and 116 Avenue (the bypass intersection) saw nine, up from 7.5; 100 Street and 99 Avenue downtown saw six, up from four; 116 Street and 100 Avenue on the west side saw six, up from three; and 100 Street and 84 Avenue on the south side saw four, up from 3.5.


Peoria, Arizona:
According to numbers from the Police Department, collisions at the four intersections have doubled since a private company finished installing red light cameras in June 2008.

During the 2007 fiscal year, from July 1 to June 30, there were 36 collisions at the intersections. In fiscal 2008, there were 73.


  • At 91st Avenue and Bell road, accidents increased 100 percent, including a 120 percent jump in rear end and “stopped for red light” collisions, in the year after red light cameras were installed. In the four months after the yellow light was increased from 4.0 to 4.5 seconds, violations immediately dropped 80 percent on the eastbound approach and 70 percent westbound.
  • At 75th Avenue and Thunderbird Road, accidents increased 480 percent. The number of right angle and head-on collisions increased from 4 to 20, while rear-end collisions also jumped 400 percent. After the yellow light was increased from 4.0 to 4.5 seconds, violations decreased 45 percent eastbound and 26 percent northbound.
  • At 83rd Avenue and Union Hills, where cameras monitor only left turns, accidents increased just 11 percent. The yellow light increase from 3.0 seconds to 3.5 seconds yielded an immediate 57 percent drop in violations.
  • At 83rd Avenue and Thunderbird Road, accidents increased 29 percent, including a 300 percent jump in rear-end collisions. This location serves as a control intersection for considering the effects of not increasing the yellow duration. Unlike the three other locations, violations increased 111 percent at this intersection where the signal timing remained unchanged at 4.5 seconds.

Taken together, accidents increased a total of 103 percent at all four intersections. This result is consistent with the findings of a number of independent studies on the effect of photo enforcement. At the three intersections with yellow light increases violations dropped an average of 42 percent. Peoria officials got the message about the importance of yellow timing.


Peoria police department data:


Corpus Christi, Texas

The total number of accidents in Corpus Christi increased 14 %, from 310 incidents to 353, at nine locations where automated ticketing machines were stationed.

Contrary to the claim that red light cameras reduce the severity of collisions, the number of accidents involving injuries increased 28 % from 140 to 179. Rear end collisions increased by nearly a third from 160 to 208.

The city’s data compared about nineteen months of accident history at nine intersections before cameras were installed compared with a roughly equal period during which the devices were actively issuing citations. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/27/2743.asp

Engineering services department – Corpus Christi data


Lubbock, Texas

The controversial red light camera program in Lubbock came to an end after a report documented a significant increase in the number of accidents at photo enforced intersections. The results were consistent with a preliminary study that also failed to document a safety benefit following the installation of automated ticketing machines.

Despite a 2.7 percent reduction in intersection crashes citywide, the total number of collisions increased at each of the eleven intersections with a red light camera when comparing the first six months of camera enforcement (July through December 2007) to the same period in 2005 without cameras. The totals reflected a 52 percent increase in collisions with rear end crashes up by 60 percent. http://thenewspaper.com/news/21/2168.asp

Lubbock Studies:



You will hear that t-bone accidents decrease with red light cameras, but the

Virginia Dot Report showed the cameras were associated with an increase of between 31 percent and 54 percent for rear-end crashes overall,” the report found. “The association of the cameras with angle crashes differed among jurisdictions, although a preponderance of test results suggested an increase.”


A preliminary examination of Scottsdale’s freeway camera program found a 54 percent increase in rear end collisions accompanied the 110,962 automated tickets issued in 2006


Multiple American studies show an increase of accidents with red light cameras:




Flash Blindness – According to Redflex, their cameras can catch the image of a driver across a full six lanes of traffic. The flash at night could be detrimental.

After a flash of bright light, cells within the light-exposed area of the retina become less sensitive to light than those outside that area, so they fail to respond as well to the same level of light. Exposure to bright light can produce an afterimage lasting for minutes to hours depending on intensity and duration of the source light.

Afterimages can have undesired effects such as spatial disorientation while operating aircrafts or vehicles.  At night, the dark-adapted pupil is wide open so flash blindness has a greater effect and lasts for a longer time. Because vision loss is sudden and takes time to recover, flash blindness can be hazardous. In aviation, pilots are trained to recover from bright nearby lightning flashes.



Increases Information overload. Prof. Simon Washington (and colleagues)
Department of Civil and Engineering ASU:

Design of [photo zones] should consider the element of surprise to drivers and should aim to minimize it. For example, the placement of cameras in close proximity to high information load locations (e.g., on- and off-ramps, underpasses, billboards,weaving sections, directional signs, etc.) should be avoided. Placement of cameras in sight-restricted locations should be avoided.  Anyone driving a car on the freeway  knows that fixed cameras and vans are being placed in these high information zones.


4. Slows Down Emergency Personnel Response Time

Across the country, EMTs and police officers are being ticketed while responding to emergencies. If a camera catches a first responder speeding, a notice will be sent to the their department. An officer will then have to go before a driver analysis committee and may be responsible for the cost of the ticket.

“The policy is leading to failure on officers to provide service,” said PLEA (phoenix law enforcement association) President Mark Spencer. According to Spencer some officers are now going slower when they respond to 911 calls. http://www.azcentral.com/12news/news/articles/2009/04/27/20090427speedcamscops04272009-CR.html#reply17461266

DPS Commander Tom Woodward says patrolmen found the Loop 101 cameras onerous. He said they might have put the public’s safety at risk. “ It deterred officers assigned to the East Valley from working that area,” Woodward says. “We still responded to calls, but officers were not in that area working traffic proactively as much as they were prior to photo enforcement.”


5. Secondary Violations

The new Phoenix/Redflex contract allows for “solution expansion” which includes secondary violations and enforcement. These could include:

Right hand turn, left hand turn violations

Failure to wear seatbelt

Expired tags

HOV lane compliance

Light rail cams

Point to point speed assessment (used overseas already)

Expired Insurance coverage, expired license plates

Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) to monitor and track the movements of drivers (used overseas already)

Engine brake noise enforcement system,  a calibrated microphone is used. (used overseas already).

Airborne speed camera equipment – used in Australia to monitor speed, driver fatigue, whether driver is wearing a seatbelt or talking on a cell phone. Tickets will be generated for vehicle owners if the driver or passengers are spotted without a seatbelt or if the driver uses a mobile phone. For the latter offense, the state will collect $338. and impose four points.


Redflex has told the media it expects to implement its overseas technology to the U.S. within ten to fifteen years. Cameras overseas are used for bus lane enforcement, railroad crossings, mobile laser system cameras, over-height and over weight capability, tire tread depth – uses a laser.


6. Targets and Burdens the Innocent

Millions of people worldwide have been the victims of malfunctioning photo radar equipment. They have lost not only money, but time defending their innocence. Others spent hours in defensive driving school, although they did nothing wrong. Switzerland, Australia, New Zealand, the Netherlands, United Kingdom, and yes, even Scottsdale has dealt this low blow to law-abiding citizens. Those who drive for a living risk losing their livelihood. In Canada, cities refuse to reimburse drivers whose tickets have been dismissed, as there is no money in the budget.








7. Conflict of Interest-

Redflex Provides court administration modules for judges, DPS, attorneys, and witnesses that presents and assesses common dispute tactics and appropriate sound counter-measures required for successful prosecution.  Arizona DPS/Redflex contract pg 2

In 1999, a ten percent surcharge was imposed on all traffic tickets to create the “Citizens Clean Election Fund.” The fund allows politicians to avoid tedious fundraising efforts.

In 2008, 65% of all the candidates running for legislative and statewide offices used the Clean Elections system according to the Clean Elections 2008 annual report. This provides Arizona’s politicians and lawmakers with a personal financial incentive to protect controversial photo enforcement programs.


In February 2008, the Commission approved $15,000,000.00 to be transferred to the State General Fund. Since 1998, when Arizona voters approved the Act, the Commission has given a total of $27.8 million to the State of Arizona’s General Fund. (P10)


It is interesting to note, the Clean Elections Commission has its own lobbyist, Michael Williams, who also represents Redflex, Arizona Highway Patrol Association,

Arizona Police Association (APA), City of Tempe, and the National Association of Driving Safety Educators.

The second-highest court in the State of Alaska struck down the photo radar program in 1997. The judges approved a lower-court determination that convictions rested on testimony from the company running the photo radar program, “witnesses the magistrates described as individuals who have a great deal at stake financially and who will testify to whatever it takes to convince’ the court in a given case…. Moreover, were we to find this evidence admissible, the questionable reliability of the testimony renders it insufficient to sustain a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt in each of these cases.”


8. Invasion of Privacy

These are not photo cameras; they are high-resolution video devices that run 24 hours a day. According to officer King with Arizona DPS, “We can just about zoom in and see stuff on the dash.”

Arizona state law requires that anyone other than a law enforcement officer who gathers evidence for use in court must be a licensed private investigator. Redflex and ATS employees have no such licenses

Redflex employees have been charged with assault, child pornography, and extreme DUI (while driving a photo radar van). They can observe your car, wife, and children and they can figure out where you live. They have access to your DMV records.


Baytown, Texas failed to implement any privacy protections for the sensitive personal information accessed and stored by its vendor, ATS. Schirmbeck showed TheNewspaper documents provided by the city that contained personal information on every motorist cited by the red light camera program since May 2008. This information included the full bank account and routing numbers of anyone who paid by check.


Redflex uses license plate recognition and point-to-point technology overseas.

Jay Heiler, Redflex Director of Government Affairs, has repeatedly promoted his company by bragging that a traffic stop by a police officer is more intrusive because the driver has to produce identification, registration and proof of insurance.

“And (the officer) sniffs you for alcohol, looks in your vehicle and runs your name for wants and warrants,” he said. “Automated traffic enforcement is the exact opposite of Big Brother.”

The tracking of the daily movements of all citizens regardless of guilt or suspicion without court order should concern everyone – even the honest and innocent.


9. Doesn’t remove any immediate threat to citizens like drunks, reckless drivers, or speeders. Again Jay Heiler, Redflex Director of Government Affairs brags, “Cameras are less intrusive,”  “Motorists quietly get a ticket in the mail instead of being stopped and interrogated for 25 minutes while their car is examined and their documents are checked. In court, they can make their case by reviewing video evidence instead of arguing about a cop’s judgment.”

1O. Creates distrust and animosity for local officials, law enforcement departments, and makes a mockery of our judicial system.

11. Delegates the state’s sovereign powers to third parties – photo radar companies.
12. National Security Risk – A foreign corporation (Redflex) is monitoring our highways, streets, neighborhoods, and school zones all across America. They are storing the data and activities of millions of American citizens. The photo radar vans (displaying the DPS logo) are the perfect acquisition for terrorists. The vans are strategically placed across the country to cause maximum damage and are also left unattended.

13. Different Penalties for Otherwise Identical Speeding Violations

“If you are pulled over by a DPS officer, for going five miles over the posted speed limit, the presumed fine is $155; but, if found responsible, you also get two points recorded against your license and your vehicle insurance will likely increase as a result. If you receive a highway photo enforcement ticket, and you are found responsible, the fine is $181.50, whether you were going 76 mph or 106 mph, and nothing is reported to MVD,” Judge Williams

Judge John C. Keegan in December issued an order declaring the state’s freeway photo radar program unconstitutional:

The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, in part:

1: … nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without

due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal

protection of the laws. (emphasis added)

Further, Article 2 of the Arizona State Constitution states:

13. Equal privileges and immunities: No law shall be enacted granting to any

citizen, class of citizens, or corporation other than municipal, privileges or

immunities which, upon the same terms, shall not equally belong to all citizens or

corporations. (emphasis added)

The clear meaning of these provisions of the Arizona and United States constitutions is

that it is unconstitutional to create one set of laws that applies only to a particular class of

defendant and not to other defendants based solely on the mechanism employed by the

government. Given the not uncommon set of circumstances where two drivers are

traveling on the same highway, at the same speed in excess of the speed limit, at the same

time, in essentially the same location and are cited by the same agency into the same

court, ARS § 41-1722 creates a distinction whereby one class of defendant is subjected to

a significantly different array of penalties than another class of defendant based solely on

the use of photo enforcement.

Now, therefore, it is the determination of this court that the provisions of ARS § 41-1722

are unconstitutional and unenforceable within the jurisdiction of this court.


Vehicles registered to a corporation, LLC, limited partnership, or family trusts are immune to photo tickets, since the corporation can’t be held liable.


Arizona state bill 1320 requires a court to report “civil” traffic violations to ADOT for commercial license holders who will now receive points.

14. Criminal Activity Has Become a Civil Matter, Not a Crime

Under Tennessee state law, running a red light is a class C misdemeanor. Under Knoxville’s ordinance that laid the groundwork for the bargain with Redflex, it is deemed a civil offense. The City of Knoxville, has decriminalized, and ceased reporting, failure to obey traffic control devise at automated enforcement intersections.

Hamilton’s chief argument is that the city has taken a misdemeanor criminal offense, which carries a slew of constitutional protections, and turned it into a civil offense, skirting the rights guaranteed to someone charged with a crime

Illegal establishment of “de facto” speed limit. Arizona Department of Transportation established speed limits are usurped by DPS’ widely published policy of enforcing only violations in excess of 11 mph over the posted speed limit. This effectively establishes +11mph as the legal limit and undermines the limits established by ADOT.


15. Denies Due Process

Across the country, citizens are being charged a fee to defend themselves in court.  In Knoxville, the cost of a photo radar ticket is $50.00. If you would like to schedule a hearing to contest the judgment, it will cost you an additional $67.50. It is peculiar how the cost of proving your innocence is more than the ticket itself.

In Bellwood, Illinois a $40 administrative fee is tacked on for those who contest their ticket. If a drivers refuses to pay the ticket, the cost of the ticket is doubled, sent to a collections agency, and put on their credit report. In Naples, it is an extra $50 to defend yourself.

Arizona’s Coconino County also participated with a $20.00 charge. The only way for the drivers to avoid the extra fee was to pay the ticket without question.


“The offensive assessment of a charge to access the Constitutional right to confront an accuser, here in the City of Knoxville, is as offensive as charging a person a sum for the right to vote, a poll tax,” said Attorney David Hamilton who has filed a class action lawsuit.

“They call them civil,” Hamilton argued Thursday. “They are not. There is not a single case in which a criminal defendant has to pay to have a hearing. No one has ever threatened to charge a defendant to schedule a hearing to defend himself. It shocks the conscience of the court. It shocks the constitution. They have turned an attack on our constitutional rights into a business.”


This complaint is about maintaining the Constitutional protections available under the United States Constitution and the State of Tennessee Constitution, and to halt the slide toward a system of laws intentionally designed to avoid Constitutional protections

when the effect of the law is to deprive due process under the law,

On information and belief, Knoxville Code Section 17-210 does, as implemented, deprive persons of the right to confront witnesses, right to speedy trial, and obtain counsel without prepaying a tax to the City when attempting to schedule a hearing, all without due process of law

On information and belief, Knoxville Code Section 17-210 does, as implemented, deprive persons of property without due process of law, and by placing the burden of proof on the car owner, deprives the car owner of the Constitutional presumption of innocence.

On information and belief, Defendant City of Knoxville, did intentionally assign Defendant Sullivan, and others, to a duty intended to deprive citizens there right of access to the court without prepayment.

The Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause, which is also echoed in Arizona’s Constitution, gives the accused the right to be confronted by witnesses against him. With speed cameras, the driver is never confronted by a police officer ticketing him. So far, local governments have skirted around constitutional protections by classifying speed camera tickets as civil, not criminal violations. Efforts to challenge the tickets based on constitutional grounds that appear to have a chance at succeeding are simply dismissed in favor of the driver, swept under the rug by local governments before they can be fully adjudicated. The American Spectator

The accused are not being provided with the opportunity to cross-examine or subpoena all camera equipment operators, anyone who handled the evidence, and the officer who issued the citation. The accused are not being provided with the opportunity to examine the design and operation of the equipment itself. This is an explicit violation of due process because the accused clearly do not have a fair opportunity to affect the outcome of their trial if they cannot question key personnel and witnesses who are responsible for the very charges they face. http://photoradarscam.com/

16. Lack of Audit and Oversight

There is no stated maintenance or audit program by any government authority of the private camera vendors and their equipment and processes to ensure reliability and accuracy.

Sensitive photo enforcement electronics are often left unattended and vulnerable in harsh and extreme weather conditions 24/7. No one knows if all of the components of a photo system are working properly at any given moment, or if equipment has started to malfunction intermittently. Equipment vendors refuse to publish their equipment reliability and error rates!

17. Leaves Motorists Defenseless

Motorists who receive photo tickets are at a severe disadvantage to make a defense due to the weeks or months that may lapse before a driver is served with a citation. A driver is unlikely to be able to recall the exigency of the violations to know if he is even guilty! Furthermore, a driver is unable to collect evidence to defend himself because there is no guarantee that signs and road conditions are the same as they were when the alleged violation occurred (especially in regards to photo radar vans).

18. Unequal Enforcement & Discrimination

Photo enforcement only targets drivers who live locally who are driving their own car with visible license plates. Many drivers are exempt or almost exempt, such as: Cars with missing, covered, temporary or otherwise unreadable plates, out of state drivers, out of country drivers, drivers of company cars, vehicles with wheelchair or bike racks, cars towing trailers or other equipment, and trucks with their tailgate down, drivers who turn head or hide their face or closely resemble a family member.

19. Double Jeopardy

It is possible for drivers to receive multiple tickets for the same speeding violation.

20.  Lucrative Photo Enforcement Favored Over Engineering

Cities rarely conduct engineering studies to determine why a particular location experiences more accidents. Officials incorrectly assume that bad drivers flock to these locations and that their behavior can be cured with the threat of tickets received weeks after the infraction. In reality, the same drivers are present in all locations and if a particular location has a high accident rate the reason is undoubtedly due to flaws or problems that can be corrected with proper traffic engineering.

Measures may include: adding signs, making signs more clear and visible, changing road striping and indicators, increasing signal visibility, adjusting light timing, and increasing signals. Until an engineering study is done, it is impossible to understand the underlying factors and thus impossible to objectively evaluate possible solutions. A number of cities have decreased the rate of accidents by extending yellow light times.


PARTICIPATE: Join us at our meetings, sign initiative to outlaw photo radar, collect signatures

COMMUNICATE: Join us at Meetup and Twitter and get educated

DONATE: Visit http://www.ArizonaCitizensAgainstPhotoRadar.com and make a contribution


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s