Browns149 Posted November 5, 2014 Report Share Posted November 5, 2014 See ya http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/11/margins_widen_in_cleveland_map.html#incart_river If the Mayor was true to his word, which is these camera's were about child safety I would have NO problem of these camera's being in school zones. But these camera's are nothing but money grabs, I live less then 1 mile from one of them, and it is at an intersection of an interstate and off ramp. I have NEVER seen a kid at that place. There isn't even a side walk there. And no school within 2 miles of that camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted November 5, 2014 Report Share Posted November 5, 2014 Doesn't that just affect the cameras in Cleveland? You live in Fairview Park according to your profile. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 5, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 5, 2014 Doesn't that just affect the cameras in Cleveland? You live in Fairview Park according to your profile. Yes and yes. But I live right on the border of Cleveland. And like I said, there is one of those camera's at the off ramp right near my house. I Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted November 5, 2014 Report Share Posted November 5, 2014 There are a couple in Parma Heights on York and Pearl. They do speed and red light. Wish they would get rid of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted November 5, 2014 Report Share Posted November 5, 2014 Yep, I drive by the one at York and Pearl a lot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 5, 2014 Report Share Posted November 5, 2014 I drive through Cleveland and all its suburbs pretty regularly. I've never been bothered by the cameras and I feel only bad drivers have reason to fear them. Here's a novel idea...don't go flying down the street running red lights. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 I drive through Cleveland and all its suburbs pretty regularly. I've never been bothered by the cameras and I feel only bad drivers have reason to fear them. Here's a novel idea...don't go flying down the street running red lights. I have never been bothered by the camera's either. But they have been ruled unconstitutional by numerous courts. SO GOOD BYE. Plus for the city to claim they are there for "SAFETY' reasons is totally bogus. They are there for 1 reason only, to get money. PERIOD. The mayor of Cleveland claimed they needed these cash machines for the safety of the children. Well then put them in school zones. And then turn them off during the summer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 I don't care what they're for. They're not hurting me. Cops can't catch every douchebag driving down the road like an idiot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 I don't care what they're for. They're not hurting me. Cops can't catch every douchebag driving down the road like an idiot. That is true. I'm a pretty cautious driver not going to bother me. But it is annoying if they pretend is for safety. It isn't. Neither is the DUI limit. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 I don't care what they're for. They're not hurting me. Cops can't catch every douchebag driving down the road like an idiot. Just like cops can't catch every thief, jaywalker, assailant, or law breaker. It doesn't give them the right to put up camera's to generate money Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Cameras are omnipresent in today's world. I know this for a fact. I have cameras in and on my house. Nearly every business has them surveilling their premises. Why SHOULD'T they use cameras to patrol the roads and enforce laws? I guarantee you your vehicle is caught by no less than 20 private cameras on any drive down a developed street more than a mile or so long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Cameras are omnipresent in today's world. I know this for a fact. I have cameras in and on my house. Nearly every business has them surveilling their premises. Why SHOULD'T they use cameras to patrol the roads and enforce laws? I guarantee you your vehicle is caught by no less than 20 private cameras on any drive down a developed street more than a mile or so long. Because it's UNCONSTITUTIONAL........... Those camera's that catch my vehicle driving down the road are not used to generate money for the Gov't. ARE THEY???? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Where in the constitution does it specify you can't use technology to enforce laws? Seems you find the technology used to enforce the law more objectionable than the law which in itself is designed to make the municipality money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Where in the constitution does it specify you can't use technology to enforce laws? Seems you find the technology used to enforce the law more objectionable than the law which in itself is designed to make the municipality money. I don't have to find it. it was ruled that way by numerous judges. I find the fact that cities try to justify these cameras as a safety issue way worse then if they are legal, which they are not. They are ALL about money collection. Safety has NOTHING to do with it. They actually increase accidents, and that is a proven fact. Then the mayor of Cleveland has the gall to say it's about "Children" safety, if that was the case they would put these cameras in school zones, or near parks, but they are not. The camera nearest me is on an off ramp for an interstate. Right next to the airport. I have NEVER seen a kid anywhere near that camera. Because we all know kids love walking down the highway to the airport Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Browns149 Posted November 6, 2014 Author Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 Another sure sign these camera's were all about the money. They were all over Cleveland, Maple Heights, and they are still in East Cleveland. All 3 places need money. You don't see well off neighborhoods putting in these camera's. There are no traffic camera's in Westlake, Bay Village, Lyndhurst, Gates Mills, or any other city that is well off. Maybe there are only bad unsafe drivers, in cities that need the money? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mohican Posted November 6, 2014 Report Share Posted November 6, 2014 The lackof constitutionality is based on getting a request to pay a fine mailed to you and having limited recourse. Cleveland was told by a (state?) judge that their speed and red light cameras were in violation of the Ohio Constitution and to cease and desist. For Cleveland to continue to operate those cameras until the voter initiative means that everyone involved in the scam were in contempt of court. There is state legislation pending which could well eliminate traffic cameras entirely. The cameras are not about safety but about revenue generation. If an area is unsafe to to traffic, a camera does not make it safer but an officer actually being there does alter behavior. A village of about 500 people near to where I am has take in $200,000.00 in speed camera fines in over two years. It's about the money, honey. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.