Comments on: Red Light cameras fleece the public

By: BD

BD — Sat, 08 Dec 2012 07:56:19 +0000

This article beautifully exemplifies mafia tactics and the basis of the STATE.
1. A group incorporates as a fictitious entity known as the “City of Encinitas”.
2. This corporation is under government sanction, specifically the State of California (Also a corporate entity).
3. This corporation has the privilege of a regional monopoly of force. What this means is that all association with individuals in society are expected, and legitimately, to be of a voluntary nature, EXCEPT those interactions with the above mentioned entities and their representatives, agents, employees, etc.
4. Such an entity “legitimizes” it’s existence based on involuntary (residing) and voluntary (voting) consent. This fictitious entity becomes a reality in the minds of those willing to except that an elite minority has the “right” to rule over the masses with the euphemistic “freedom of democracy” (majority ruling over the minority) justifying coercive means.
5. This is a mafia! The bosses get paid the spoils and the minion servants are thrown scraps such as higher than private sector wages with inflated pensions. You always treat the members of the gang (“family”) better than the common prey (resident/citizen). We are “prey” because we are preyed upon just as a highway-robber preys upon their victims. The highway-robber claims illegitimate ownership of your possessions and ability to travel freely. This is the same tactic of government/STATE entities. They hold claim to regions which fictitious entities have no right to claim. The soil on which we stand is not owned by an arbitrary and ever-interchangeable political body, but rather those which privately own land through voluntary exchange.
What is also important to understand is that these thousands of victims of highway robbery are guilty of no “crime”. Traffic courts in California are legally Criminal Courts. Therefore their rulings and proceedings are based on criminal law. In order for prosecution to have “grounds”, there must be “Corpus Delecti” or a damaged body/property. In traffic court the prosecutor is the “City of Encinitas” (for example) a representative entity of the State of California. There is no damaged party and therefore no grounds, though. Also, the Judge (which interestingly sits on the “bank”) represents and is payed by none other than the State of California. This is a conflict of interest (to the amount of 78% in Encinitas) as the judging party is financially linked to the prosecuting party. Not quite a fair trial. This is grounds for dismissal and any judge attempting to do anything to the contrary is no longer holding an impartial position, but rather imposing a position of tyranny.
These are the tactics of the STATE. A legislative to create statutes to control the masses, an executive to enforce the rules of elites and a judiciary to legitimize the entire system.

By: Jon B

Jon B — Thu, 05 Jul 2012 19:00:24 +0000

The red light cameras need to taken down!!! I will vote for city consul member that supports eliminating the red light cameras in Encinitas!!!

By: James C. Walker

James C. Walker — Sun, 01 Jul 2012 18:43:45 +0000

It is virtually certain that using safer, longer yellow intervals would prevent MORE violations and produce better safety than the red light camera cash registers. WHY don’t cities use the safer, longer yellows? There is one, and only one, reason: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$. Maximizing safety is NOT profitable, but mis-engineering for more tickets is.
James C. Walker, National Motorists Association, Ann Arbor, MI

By: Henry

Henry — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 00:54:31 +0000

Every car owner needs to know about Snitch Tickets, the fake/phishing tickets sent out by the police to bluff the registered owner into identifying the actual driver of the car. (Local depts. using them are Escondido, Del Mar, Encinitas, El Cajon, Oceanside, Poway, Solana Beach, and Vista.) Snitch Tickets have not been filed with the court, so they don’t say “Notice to Appear,” don’t have the court’s addr. and phone #, and usually say (on the back, in small letters), “Do not contact the court about this notice.” Since they have NOT been filed with the court, they have no legal weight whatsoever. You can ignore a Snitch Ticket. If in doubt, Google the term.

By: Dave R

Dave R — Sat, 30 Jun 2012 00:21:24 +0000

Numerous studies have shown that red-light cameras have dubious benefits while significantly increasing the risk of fraud in the name of increased revenues.

What has been proven without a doubt to reduce red-light accidents is to increase the amount of time spent on yellow and increase the amount of time waiting before turning the next set of lights green.

If you want traffic enforcement at a problematic intersection – camp an sheriff there a a couple days a week. Then he can not only catch red-light violators but also the many people who speed and chat on their phones without regard for their fellow motorists.

By: Tom Munnecke

Tom Munnecke — Fri, 29 Jun 2012 21:27:40 +0000

A reduction of 15%-50% of accidents is a very significant accomplishment.

And its the LAW that a car be able to stop in time to prevent a rear-ending of the car in front of them.

The simplest way to avoid these fines is to not run red lights.

I’m happy that the city and the Sheriff’s department are enforcing the laws…

By: Dave

Dave — Fri, 29 Jun 2012 21:27:25 +0000

The real point here is that the people we elected to positions to make decisions on OUR behalf have turned a blind eye to the original reason they’re in office. The red-light cameras are proof of that. So, find out who voted the cameras IN and the next time they’re up for reelection make sure that someone else gets the job. It’s that simple. Oh -and flooding the mayor’s office with complaints on a daily basis won’t hurt. DAILY. Hourly. How about “Occupy red light camera intersections”?