Yesterday, Private Citizen said..."Who cares if "safety" is a ploy.
What's so bad about red light cameras?
They might keep people from blowing a red light which in
turn might make the streets safer.
Even if they don't do that, they'll generate revenue for the city.
I don't see the down side here".
August 27, 2008 10:47 PM
The PRU Crew says...
We care. We care because we've had a belly full of bullshit getting shoveled to the citizens. We care because we are sick of the bullshit that busy, distracted, and sometimes unthinking citizens seem willing to swallow from ploy employing bullshit artists. We care because we actually believe in concepts like "truth in advertising". We care because we have the right to demand that governments not just appear to be doing something, but actually produce results. We care because when a government tells citizens they are doing something for their safety, they better mean it and do it. We care because the consequences for failing to deliver on promises of increased safety for citizens can be very fucking serious. We care because claiming to provide a mechanism for increased safety that may actually produce some greater harm of unintended consequences can't be balanced out by any amount of increased revenue.
We care because the bullshit, cavalier, bureau-rat mindset of statements like yours, Private Citizen, are why there is so much waste in government and apathy among citizens who've grown tired of even bothering to fight the fight.
We care. That's why this blog exists.
August 28, 2008
A Spotlight On Private Citizen's Comment!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
39 comments:
An update of the story of the two homeless people who attacked a couple in the south loop.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-homeless-robbery-arrests-botaug28,0,1825124.story
Now that is scary.
WHEW!!!!!
Now tell us how you really feel!!
"... statements like yours .... are why there is .... apathy among citizens who've grown tired of even bothering to fight the fight."
And I thought it was just me shaking his head thinking we *all* get the government that *they* deserve.
Thanks, PRU. Someone still has to rage, rage, rage.
Whoa...lookes like Private Citizen is the one who peed in your Cornflakes today, eh PRU crew...?
...not that I don't agree with everything you've said...of course I do...I've seen far too much of the things bemoaned too...
---------------------------
Anonymous at 9:58,
"Attacked"...? Surely you got the memo...homeless people are no different than anyone in PR... I'm sure you didn't mean to say "attacked"... I'm sure you meant to say "had a negative interaction with"...you know, the sort of middling, soothing ooze sorts of phrases used to take the edge off these sorts of "unfortunate occurances"...
Rule #1...never write an e-mail when your pissed off.
Rule #2... the private citizens is who the goverment is working for.
Cameras as well as red light have been used in Europe for many years. It is working!!! Do your homework and check the stats!!!
This is the way it seem to work here sometimes.
1. Form your opinion.
2. Pick your data/stats to support your opinion.
3. Start attacking.
Ready set go!!
There is data out there that says that the effectiveness of these cameras is inconclusive and that they may even ,in some cases, cause crashes. There is also data that says they work. Pick one that supports your opinion.
"Never miss a good chance to shut up."~~Will Rogers
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe." ~~ Albert Einstein
PRU don't hold back now. I'd hate to see you really mad. :)
We think we do a pretty good job of challenging and checking each other.
On the subject of today's post, which for those who missed it is the way citizens are treated like children by pols and bureau-rats whose bottom line message to you is --
So what if something isn't true? Tell 'em it's good for 'em and let's make some money to spend while we do it!
-- we will continue to speak out against the bullshit.
But everyone should feel free to wallow in and enjoy as much bullshit as they can handle. Don't say nobody warned you though!
" ...peed in your Cornflakes today..."? Eeew. I mean, EEEW.
Keep raging, PRU. Not too long ago people found a perfectly appropriate phrase, "If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention." I/we like it that you're paying attention - not the least of reasons being that I, for one, sometimes feel that I've "grown tired of even bothering to fight the fight."
Oh charles,
whatever you do don'e ever let them beat you into submission. I assure you that if silent, you WILL without a doubt lose, but if you fight the good fight you just may find that you actually win a few. Keep your chin up it's not that bad.
I have a proposal on the red light camera idea and it'll save you big dollars, just put an amnesty box at every other intersection and those of you who must run the light can just stop at the next one and put your money in...
as far as Europe, they do a lot of stuff over there, I guess if I really want to live in a third world country I'd be there already.
By the way, polyester suits are on sale at walmart!!
Speaking of bs, here is another story about those down on there luck upstanding homeless folk.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news
/local/chicago/
chi-mchenry-theft-nwblotter-bothaug29,0,4715537.story
At least now I understand why the PRMA don't want to walk the talk.
Just read the story of the homeless attack. WOW. And they want to tell us that those kind of things wouldn't happen here, Pads will make sure that their clients are much safer. How on earth could they ever know that, because the clients tells them, don't worry I'm not the big bad wolf, I just need help I'm down on my luck. Again, WOW. Not to say that that kind of thing couldn't happen at any time anyway, but why increase the chances by inviting more into the community? Does this make sense to anyone?
Classic,
Apparently too inarticulate to explain your thoughts and passion using intelligent and persuasive language, you resort to one profanity after another.
Unfortunately, rather than make a strong case for an issue I agree with you about, you loose all credibility as a hostile, ranting nut. How can that be productive?
How about using the standard of writing where you would be proud of having your children, should you be so blessed, hearing or reading your thoughts?
Instead of taking your time to make your own argument on the subject using words of your own choosing, then pointing to it as your preferred method of communication, you engage in a bit of a scolding rant of your own. So noted.
On subjects that have, and we quote, "consequences that are ---- fucking serious", the entire PRU Crew is extremely hostile to those who piddle in the middle.
On the subject of blue language -- Among adults, for whom this site is intended, we do use some curse words; these are the words adults use to express a heightened level of irritation and anger. If you do not feel yourself ready to engage on that level, please don't let the door hit you in the ass as you exit.
PRU,
How does using profanity relate to being an "adult" and, what "level" are you trying to reach? Basement? Sub-basement.
Again, a sign of an unintelligent person is certainly the need to convey an emotion using profanity.
I do appreciate your concern about my well being, but if it's all the same to you, I'll stop by periodically to read the latest nonsense.
Can we consider all posters take an avatar instead of 17 anonymous?
We believe we've already answered your first question. Regarding your second and third, we'll presume those to be rhetorical for editorial purposes.
We feel intelligent people can avoid fixation on a single tree and take in the forest view. We wish you the best of luck on that count.
You are welcome to continue to peruse our offerings. As you are an adult, though we have no proof, we feel you have the right to make that choice for yourself.
Our moderators would dearly welcome some level of differentiation. The comment moderation and notification software can be difficult to manage sometimes, when there is an increased level of posting -- comments attach to each other, one after another, in the notice.
PRU - Your concerns on red light cameras are still very cryptic to me.
"We care because claiming to provide a mechanism for increased safety that may actually produce some greater harm of unintended consequences can't be balanced out by any amount of increased revenue."
What does that mean?
I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from. What kind of unintended consequences do you fear that red light cameras will bring about?
All I've gotten so far is that you're ticked that the gov't is telling us that red light cameras will help make the streets safer. I'm no traffic engineer but that seems reasonable to me.
Again, even if you're right and they don't make the streets safer (a view which I tend to oppose, albeit I freely admit to being ignorant of any data or facts) the cameras will generate some revenue from traffic tickets.
Big deal!
Is our host a closet red light runner?
These stupid cameras are all about raising money. When our fellow Park Ridge residents start getting their tickets in the mail, they'll begin complaining about the police department issuing the tickets.
They'll all forget that the police had nothing to do with the red light cameras. None of the working police officers asked for them.
The politicians did.
But it will become another reason for people who already dislike the police to complain about them.
Private Citizen --
You are wrong on all points.
You have said you do not care if these RLCs do not deliver what they promise. You have said you do not care if what is being promised is only a ploy. You have said you view revenue generation as a trump for all conerns and lies. You have a right to those views.
We think your views are bullshit.
Regarding our opposition to RLCs, please click on the Red Light Camera tag at the bottom of this post and review.
I believe you are wrong on this one. Most citizens I have spoken with are in favor of the RLC's.
Shouldn't we be more concerned about our towns developement, traffic patterns & parking? Maybe who our next Mayor should be????
Just a thought!
From a selfish point of view, technology advances with law enforcement scares the hell out of me. In theory they could calculate the time between toll booths on your I-Pass and send you a ticket. My car has GPS and within a few years it will be standard equipment. Again, in theory they could track your speed via satellite. I had better get a good lawyer. I have also seen some of that data that suggests that cameras can cause crashes. I can understand the argument that this is nothing but a money maker for the city.
But (you knew there was a but), when I see what drivers do, not just a few but many, at the stop signs in residential areas in PR, I see cameras in a different way. I see parents with kids in the mini-van rushing to drop them off at school who barely tap the brakes, and this is when other kids are walking to school. There has been 4 accidents at the corner down the block from me in the just over 4 years I have lived here. After there is an accident, they station police at that corner. People come up to the stop sign, see the squad car down the street and stop, usually abruptly. Of course you cannot have an officer at that corner all the time. So I ask myself one question. If there was a camera at that corner would people stop. My answer to that is generally yes. To me that is a good thing. To me, that is increasing public safety.
I realize there are holes in this. Of course you cannot have a camera at every intersection. Of course there will be people passing through who blow the stop sign. Of course you will have the guy with the cell phone zoning out. It is not going to prevent every accident from happening but it is going to make sure that those who travel that route on a regular basis are doing what they should be doing anyway. Obeying the traffic laws - me included.
It's all about the money.
Redlight cameras are revenue generators.
Think about it.
If safety was the issue, any police department could tell a cop to stand on a corner with a camera in his/her hand and to take a picture of anyone running a red light. One cop, one $200 camera sold at Costco and there are cameras at intersections.
But, it didn't happen that way. Why? Money. A company created a need. It had a camera. The camera had one obvious use. Only the company couldn't itself make any money off of that use. The company couldn't start patrolling the streets. So… here's the genius of it… it involved cities. The cities surrender a little of its police power (licensing it to the company).
If this was about safety, any one of the 50 states would have spent some pocket change to develop this sort of camera. Technologically it isn't a complicated device. A starter when the light goes red, a motion detector and a picture. We're not talking about sending a man to the moon here.
The company could just sell those cameras, but that doesn't generate serious coin. Open-ended licenses, however, that's where the money is. Any sucker, I mean city, can license one or more of these beauties on an open ended deal. (Imagine if we bought vehicles that way.) The company gets a licensing fee for the camera and then a "processing fee" for each ticket. Think about all the junk mail you get. Obviously it doesn't cost anything to produce. Sending out a ticket will cost just as much as sending out another credit card offer. Who here thinks the "processing fee" will be equal to the cost of sending out a new credit card offer? Yeah… me neither.
How does the company sell this to the city? Easy. Get everyone torqued up on "Safety". Then we have the same old debate. "Think about the children!" on the one hand battling it out with the rights based discussions on the other. Seems we had that discussion when companies realized if they put McDonald's cashier level people between me and the airline gate, they could make a pretty penny.
And the company is counting its fees.
The day I can come up with a gimmick like this, I'm going to quit my day job, start cashing those checks and then move into one of those big houses in town that everyone is complaining about.
It's all about the money.
We aren't wrong about the points we've made regarding RLCs. We haven't said that most residents don't favor them. What we have said is that residents are being given nothing more than a sales pitch using the safety angle, what Private Citizen rightly calls a ploy, but that on closer inspection the root of this public policy is simply revenue generation.
Maybe people and the pols will reconsider the issue should the next fatal rearend collision in town be tied to an RLC; an increase in rearend collisions being something even proponents of RLCs admit happen, and the types of accidents the City's own excell traffic study says are the type that most often occur at these intersections. Will the City again be liable for a fatal rearend collision? As one poster here noted on another subject, keep the lawyers on speed dial.
But, as we have said -- enjoy and wallow in the bullshit, and keep telling yourselves that this is all about safety, though not enough about safety to put these things at every intersection, and not just about money making.
We've stated our position, opinion, and offered resources for review. And we accept that a majority of people have the right to, and probably do, disagree with the Crew's position and opinion on this issue. Don't say nobody warned you of the downsides or that you weren't told the truth about the motivating factors.
-- and we see "Charles" has added his opinion to the discussion. We agree.
I like the idea of red light cameras, regardless of the revenue, capitalism, and conflicting safety issues.
I think that everyone in town who supports RLC should wear, lets see,white shirts are taken, khaki pants. Yeah, the khaki-pants-for-red-light-cameras campaign. And if you dont have khaki pants, just wear jeans, uh GAP jeans.
And if you against RLCs, don't wear khakis, or any pants for that matter. That way it will be easy to pick you out in a crowd.
Remember,
pants - for cameras
no pants - against cameras.
Oh, shorts and skirts count as pants too.
I wonder who would be accused of Nazi like intimidation.
Personally, I find no pants to be more intimidating.
To expand on 10:20AM's comments:
IDOT is already using I-Passes to track people. The travel times posted on signs on the highways are calculated from taking a sample of I-Pass users passing sensors along the roads. They track particular I-passes from one location to another and then calculate the travel times. So the sensors are already in place and the computers are already in place on roads that are not even tollways. As soon as the state budget really goes bad, someone will say "Let's make our roads safer by ticketing people who speed." There will be almost no cost to implement this - simply reprogram the computers and start sending out the tickets.
Big Brother is already watching.
Anonymous August 29, 2008 1:57 PM
If we can nominate people for the Nazi intimidation awards, I'll offer Frimark's name. He loves to try to intimidate people. Calls their bosses to complain. Calls their spouses bosses to complain. Makes up full blown lies and spreads them around. Has his henchmen pull dirty tricks for him. Screams about filing lawsuits. Screams thhreat to cut people's balls off before slamming his city hall office door.
He can't go without pants though. They cover up that he doesn't have any real balls of his own to speak of.
I nominate Howard Frimark for the Nazi intimidation award in the Mr. Whisper-Screamer Nazi category.
Anonymous at 4:13,
BWAAAHHHAAAA...!!!
Hey, all you "White Shirts" have a lot to learn... HOward makes y'all look like pikers in the intimidation-efforts arena!
OK, I believe that PRU was trying to get your attention to a rather large expense to “stop the light violators”, but when folks don’t realize that it is the underlying problem is that you are enforcing a law by just throwing out a citation regarding a vehicle, not an individual, like the driver who actually ran the light, but the vehicle owner. Sounds like a revenue generator, just like their citation quota, which for some, remember the case went before the state supreme court of political hacks. Years later it was found that the city projects the number of tickets written and the amount of money it raises…
Good luck trying to explain to the sheep what is going on.
Wow, Frymark's a nazi???
I didn't read that in the Elk report, so I think your mistaken.
Have another Scooter Pie
Lots of people wearing pants at the farmers market today.
Its a groundswell of support I tell ya.
I agree...with aug 29th..Frimark and
his band of boot-lickers....
Land of the free!
Not the Fees!
Frimark really calls the employers of people to complain about them? Why would he do that to people who are volunteering their time in the community? I can't believe that. Why wouldn't he just directly call the people he's disagreeing with? This makes no sense.
Welcome to Howardwood.
Post a Comment