Once people get used to them it will get better. Personally I am for them. I was in Germany where they are used all over and it keeps the cops dealing with real problems instead of the speeders or red light runners.

Except when something like what happened to a friend of mine happens. He was “flashed” as we called it going through an intersection but he did nothing wrong (green light), so he made a u turn and went through again, he got flashed again. He did the 4 times and each time was flashed. He reported it to the local Polezie and was told nothing was wrong with it. A month later he got 4 tickets for not wearing his seat belt!

teddgcm - “once people get used to them…”

Couldn’t the same be said of house to house searches?

Sounds like your buddy, although right, got a lesson about arguing with city hall :)

Thanks for the comments.

Well Bolingbrook, IL had them. And yes they generated revenue for the city. They were removed, I’m told because of traffic accident problem. However, I think it was more the Mayor was taking too much heat from disgruntled citizens about the tickets.

Lefty, I think comparing Stop light cameras to house to house searches is a bit far fetched. the cameras to catch speeders or other traffic violators is not an invasion of privacy, you are already out in public. If someone on the side of the road were to take a picture of your passing car, while you might be upset, it is not illegal. Using these devices has been proven in most other countries. i am not saying that CCTV should be installed on the streets like Europe, but these devices, meant to help the police, I think, are fine.

zen: I’m betting the latter too, but the former is a very good point.

tedd: I’m not comparing. I just got set off by the phrase. Legally speaking, you’re correct. Realistically, that’s not why they’re being installed though.

Thanks for the comments!
You are making blogging more fun than I thought it could be.