Max Heim SEZ -
> I personally can't get too worked up about this "infringement of personal
> freedom"... if you don't run red lights, you won't get busted. But that's
> just me... maybe some people like to run red lights as a matter of course...
The problem is that it's not just to catch red light runners. Running
red lights and performing "California stops" at stop signs seem to be
big hobbies around here. Those people burn me up because they not only
show a lack of respect for the rule of law, and for their fellow drivers,
but they're also dangerous. The problem is that municipalities use these
devices primariy as revenue generators. They *reduce* the duration of
the amber light so that people will find themselves running a red light
when they assumed they had plenty of time to clear the intersection.
This leads to people standing on their brakes the instant the light turns
amber, and this can be just as dangerous as running the light. And then
there is the fact that the owner of the car is assumed guilty. What
happened to "probable cause"?
The solution to the problem of running red lights is to station police
officers at the intersections and write the b*st*rds big hefty tickets.
The solution is not for municipalities to enter into extortion rackets
which they cynically sell to a credulous population as a solution to
a real public safety problem.
> Or, more charitably, maybe it's a case of "I don't agree with what you [do],
> but I'll defend to the death your right to [do] it"... which, if you think
> about it, is pretty darn silly in this case, if not outright dangerous.
See above. It's not about a "freedom to run red lights". It's about
traffic safety, which a parasitic government is using as a cynical
excuse for persuing for its own cynical money grubbing ends.
--
David Breneman
Distributed Systems Software Analyst
DHL/Airborne Express
3101 Western Avenue
Seattle, WA 98121
Phone: +1-206-830-4253
Fax: +1-206-830-4432
david.breneman@dhl.com
(This .sig is greater than 4 lines as mandated by company policy.)
|