Even Clive McFarlane has been successfully cajoled with the full set of talking points that have been foisted upon the public... and I'm sure he actually believes he's got a full grasp of all the issues surrounding the placement of video cameras at intersections to catch people going through red lights.
Take this rumor, for instance... "I know Worcester’s interest in putting cameras at selective intersections was triggered by the perception that there were seldom traffic officers around to stem the rampant violations of traffic laws in the city."
As a taxi driver, I see a lot of examples of stupid driving every day. Every once in a while, I see people slip through a red light. The overwhelming majority of "red light runners" I've ever seen tend to make sure they're not risking their lives, however. But "rampant"?
Sorry, but this characterization of "the problem" these cameras are supposed to "solve" is completely false.
This isn't a complex issue. At three thousand dollars per month per camera, it's very simple. On the day that a state changes the law to make these things legal, a company like Nestor can immediately start raking in millions of dollars per month.
People like Clive unwittingly contribute the lion's share of promo to make that happen.
And for what? To solve a problem that doesn't even exist.
.
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comments:
These cameras would be like the ice rink on the Common. Solving a problem that doesn't even exist.
Post a Comment