Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The Newspaper)   Voters in Ohio city reject speed cameras. Bonus: City forced to refund money already collected. Bonus bonus: City has to keep paying rent on cameras until contract expires   (thenewspaper.com) divider line
    More: Spiffy  
•       •       •

7859 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 08 Nov 2006 at 8:14 AM (17 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Copy Link



170 Comments     (+0 »)


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2006-11-08 8:11:15 AM  
I hope other states get the idea and back off the cameras. You don't mess with fundamental American rights, like the right to speed through intersections and run red lights.
 
2006-11-08 8:15:13 AM  
Downside: city gets rent money from taxes
 
2006-11-08 8:17:15 AM  
Awesome. Except for the taxpayers having to pay the rent, but still awesome.

Stupid city.
/fark needs an Ohio tag? Florida's bastard sibling?
 
2006-11-08 8:17:42 AM  
Does this mean Sarah Connor is safe?
 
2006-11-08 8:18:48 AM  
Smitty needs to work on Headlines 101. The city losing money comes from the residents, and it goes to one lucky speed camera company that everyone seemed to despise so
 
2006-11-08 8:19:13 AM  
Democracy does work!
 
fj  
2006-11-08 8:20:21 AM  
I'm sure that although they voted out the speed cameras, they neglected to vote out the retards who decided they were a good idea.
 
2006-11-08 8:20:24 AM  
Yeah, how is this awesome?

I mean, yay for no speed cameras, that's a law I like breaking and should be free to do so without getting caught.

But how's it good that the city is wasting lots of money?
 
2006-11-08 8:21:20 AM  
D-D-D-Dave

Thank you for pointing that out.

/Shame on smitty.
 
2006-11-08 8:24:40 AM  
Next ordinance.
Increase annual taxes for everyone by $85 to export American money to Germany.
 
2006-11-08 8:24:56 AM  
Why don't we all get to vote whether or not we want speed cameras? Is this a police state? Because pretty everyone would vote against them and then we wouldn't have them. We could save tax payer money by not paying for the cameras and people to take care of them, and we could stop taking money away from the poor people who were going 5 miles an hour over the speedlimit (like 90% of the population).
 
2006-11-08 8:27:03 AM  
Yeah, that last one isn't really a bonus.
 
2006-11-08 8:27:14 AM  
Jektal: But how's it good that the city is wasting lots of money?

Because hopefully it will keep other juristictions from making the same dumbass mistake.
 
2006-11-08 8:27:49 AM  
celtic004
Why don't we all get to vote whether or not we want speed cameras?
Because pretty everyone would vote against them and then we wouldn't have them.


You answered your own question.
 
2006-11-08 8:28:05 AM  
I can't believe anyone would be surprised by the result of this. The only type of enforcement I could see being even remotely palatable by the general public was if the speed at which you need to be over the limit was raised to at least 15 mph over the speed limit.

Lets face it, at 15 over you know youre speeding - but you can end up 5 over changing the radio station or sneezing.
 
2006-11-08 8:28:30 AM  
Nothing says America like the right to privacy while speeding and mowing down pedestrians. And yes, put it to a vote and the criminals will vote themselves amnesty. Way to go, lawbreakers!
 
2006-11-08 8:28:58 AM  
Due process is a good thing. As is the "innocent until proven guilty" principle.

That's why cameras are bad.
 
2006-11-08 8:29:24 AM  
Good! Very good! I hope this does send a message to other cities, as well, because very few people in their right minds would support surveillance and cameras all over their streets, even if they are just for speeding and red lights.
 
2006-11-08 8:29:39 AM  
Can we vote to make speeding legal if you're really really late?
 
2006-11-08 8:30:18 AM  
palad - I agree
 
2006-11-08 8:30:29 AM  
we call it stupidville (southern ohio)

\from NE Ohio
 
2006-11-08 8:30:37 AM  
palad

Nothing says America like the right to privacy while speeding and mowing down pedestrians. And yes, put it to a vote and the criminals will vote themselves amnesty. Way to go, lawbreakers!


Yes, because everyone who goes over the speed limit is "mowing down pedestrians."

That's a stupid assertation; it's not some chronic problem. Why do people even want to abide by asinine laws, such as artificially low speed limits designed to entrap people and gain revenue from tickets, anyway?
 
2006-11-08 8:31:21 AM  
,i>celtic004
Why don't we all get to vote whether or not we want speed cameras?
Because pretty everyone would vote against them and then we wouldn't have them.

You answered your own question.

Lol yes but isnt this supposed to be a democracy? The only reason they have speed cameras is to take our money. Its not really about safety. If no one would vote for it then it means it shouldnt happen. If I were less lazy I'd contact my local represenative and complain.
 
2006-11-08 8:31:53 AM  
Was this Rome, OH?
 
2006-11-08 8:33:37 AM  
bonus: city has to keep paying rent on cameras until contract expires

They really stuck it to the man
 
2006-11-08 8:33:59 AM  
Go one better and vote the nanny-state pickpockets the hell out of office next time around too.

/suck it big brother
 
2006-11-08 8:34:13 AM  
Nothing says America like the right to privacy while speeding and mowing down pedestrians. And yes, put it to a vote and the criminals will vote themselves amnesty. Way to go, lawbreakers!

I dare you to come to Paris and try to cross the street.
 
2006-11-08 8:36:14 AM  
2006-11-08 08:28:30 AM palad

Nothing says America like the right to privacy while speeding and mowing down pedestrians. And yes, put it to a vote and the criminals will vote themselves amnesty. Way to go, lawbreakers!

I vote you for smartest person ever!

/sarcasm like mad crazy
 
2006-11-08 8:36:58 AM  
Another Thing i have never had to worry about liveing in the south.......


I dont know you people put up with that much interfernce from your goverments.
 
2006-11-08 8:39:46 AM  
palad: Nothing says America like the right to privacy while speeding and mowing down pedestrians. And yes, put it to a vote and the criminals will vote themselves amnesty. Way to go, lawbreakers!

Nothing says idiot than, well, you.
 
2006-11-08 8:39:51 AM  
I dont know you people put up with that much interfernce from your goverments.

True, if you live in the South you dont have to worry about government involvement. Just ask anyone who was around for Hurricane Katrina.
 
2006-11-08 8:40:15 AM  
As if anyone thought they would votes yes. It's pretty much a pointless PR referendum.
 
2006-11-08 8:40:56 AM  
Why don't we all get to vote whether or not we want speed cameras?
Because pretty everyone would vote against them and then we wouldn't have them.

You answered your own question.

Lol yes but isnt this supposed to be a democracy?


No, America was deliberately set up as a republic, not a democracy. But you knew that, right?
 
2006-11-08 8:41:04 AM  
Yunus: True, if you live in the South you dont have to worry about government involvement. Just ask anyone who was around for Hurricane Katrina.

Thanks for your input no life flame baiter guy.
 
2006-11-08 8:41:13 AM  
I'm with Pixelvision, solitary, D-D-D-Dave. . .

/And probably everyone else who came here to point out that when cities waste money, it's generally not a good thing.
 
2006-11-08 8:43:12 AM  
*sigh* I know that speed limits are ridiculous here in maryland. Nothing like having roads with nothing around you but trees and grass, with only a 30 mph speed limit.

The cops not only let us speed, but speed right along with us. There are many roads (or sections of them) where we as the public pretty much set our own speed limit, and the cops don't mind. If they see most of the population going over the speed limit, they won't pay attention to it. For example, there's a stretch of road near city limit that has a 25mph speed limit, but because the road isn't really crowded and it's 3 lanes wide, most of us go 40 on the road, and the cops do not do anything about it.

It's only when you give them a good reason to pull you over that they will, i.e. racing or going faster than the rest of a group of speeding drivers.

If speed cameras were ever made legal here in maryland, I'd go nuts. Red light cameras are already bad enough. I can understand the purpose for having red light cameras, but there are many times when they do not help at all. For instance, let's take a rainy day with wet roads. If the light you're coming up turns yellow and only lasts a couple seconds, you're either going to have to go through the light or slam on your brakes and stop in the middle of the intersection if you're within a certain distance of that light. Either way, thanks to the red light cameras, you lose.

I think all speed and red light cameras need to be done away with, they're not really fair and violates due process IMO
 
2006-11-08 8:44:48 AM  
,i>Why don't we all get to vote whether or not we want speed cameras?
Because pretty everyone would vote against them and then we wouldn't have them.

You answered your own question.

Lol yes but isnt this supposed to be a democracy?

No, America was deliberately set up as a republic, not a democracy. But you knew that, right?

Lol but its still not a police state. When people try to take away my money for no good reason it really pisses me off. If they can vote on it there must be someway the rest of us can.
 
2006-11-08 8:45:04 AM  
celtic004: If you read the article you'd realize the only reason they were allowed to vote on the speed cameras is because the local courts had ruled them illegal otherwise.
 
2006-11-08 8:49:07 AM  
Yes well the courts should rule them illegal everywhere. I read the article, thanks jerk.
 
2006-11-08 8:52:55 AM  
Speed cameras are useless.

Imagine someone doing 200km/h past a speed camera. Will that stop him from losing control 1km down the road and potentially wipe out a few dozen people? Nope. Does pulling him over and busting his ass work? Yes.
 
2006-11-08 8:54:53 AM  
SpongBub: You don't mess with fundamental American rights, like the right to speed through intersections and run red lights.

It's a privacy issue, not a "fundamental right to be dangerous" issue.

And for the record, I'm against the cameras because I want cops to go out and do more work. We pay them to work, not erect cameras in their place.
 
2006-11-08 8:56:09 AM  
celtic004: If they can vote on it there must be someway the rest of us can.

Has writing your Congress-critter gone the way the dodo? If you don't like the policies that affect your way of life, do something about it.
 
2006-11-08 8:56:13 AM  
Yunus: True, if you live in the South you dont have to worry about government involvement. Just ask anyone who was around for Hurricane Katrina.

Yup. They mayor of New Orleans and the Governor did nothing util the Feds got involved! Yay for flooded school busses!!

[image from amren.com too old to be available]
 
2006-11-08 8:57:07 AM  
PWN3D!
 
2006-11-08 8:57:37 AM  
Congress-critter

What is the origin of this?
And do people using this realize it is rather hard to take someone seriously in any way when they use such a silly choice of phrasing?
 
2006-11-08 8:57:54 AM  
celtic004

Yes well the courts should rule them illegal everywhere.


So you WANT a police state. Why couldn't you have said so earlier?
 
2006-11-08 8:59:00 AM  
dj4aces:

And for the record, I'm against the cameras because I want cops to go out and do more work. We pay them to work, not erect cameras in their place.


And nothing makes for dangerous, too slow drivers and messed up traffic like a cop setting up a speed trap.

If you pass one and do not flash your lights at oncoming traffic, you are completely inhuman scum. Don't enable them!
 
2006-11-08 9:00:00 AM  
Oh yah, I totally said that I want a police state... (what the hell are you talking about?)

Because courts getting rid of laws (rather than making more) is so facist.
 
2006-11-08 9:01:36 AM  
celtic004: 5 miles an hour over the speedlimit (like 90% of the population).

Source for that bullshiat?
 
2006-11-08 9:01:38 AM  
tonglebeak >

the problem with that kind of situation ia that should the cops ever decide they want to do something about it, there's nothing you can do to prevent it. And you can be certain that some day someone with the police department will figure out that area and put in a speed trap.
 
Displayed 50 of 170 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.