Jump to content
|Topic||Stats||Last action by|
|HTC One M8 users finally get Android 5.0 update in Europe, but there's a catch||
|Microsoft's Security Essentials Fails Latest Antivirus Test||
|Formula 1 Silly Season 2015||
|Meet Vivaldi, a new browser from the former CEO of Opera||
|Man masturbates outside after mom won't let him watch porn||
Posted 02 February 2013 - 02:04
Posted 02 February 2013 - 02:24
Sure they do.
That last bit did not go over well with American Traffic Solutions (ATS), the Arizona-based company that enforces East Cleveland’s camera citations.
“By attempting to hide behind an immunity claim, you are aiding and abetting your drivers in their blatant disregard for the traffic laws in East Cleveland, which have endangered other drivers, pedestrians and school children,” ATS attorney George Hittner wrote in his three-page response to Breslin, who received it on Thursday. (He also cc'd the postmaster general, two U.S. representatives and two senators.)
Posted 02 February 2013 - 02:26
Posted 02 February 2013 - 02:29
Sure they do.
The only thing that the red light cameras do is generate money for the city, that's it. There's 4 where I live and accident statistics in the past 10 years have shown that they haven't really reduced red light accidents at all and in some cases they've actually increased.
Posted 02 February 2013 - 02:50
Not sure about the US but in the UK they make a LOT of money from them;
City really doesnt make much on the cameras in the big picture. They make more in property taxes, and hotel taxes (Speaking of my city here in california) than they do on the cameras. There is alot of upkeep involved with them from being defaced and having some one service them, etc. Infact here they removed them due to the cost.