Armey Exposes Traffic-Light

Spying

Dick Armey

Tuesday, June 26, 2001

New Camera Report
A new report reveals that profit is the true motive behind the red light camera
program in California. Learn more about the report, and read the documents for
yourself.
http://freedom.house.gov/auto/orwellatm.asp

Wes Vernon
Armey Exposes Traffic-Light Spying
Tue Jun 26 10:55:37 2001

Armey Exposes Traffic-Light Spying

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2001/6/25/195458.shtml

Wes Vernon

Tuesday, June 26, 2001

WASHINGTON - Gotcha! House Majority leader Dick Armey has turned the
spotlight on legal documents showing that profit, not safety, is the guiding
principle in yellow traffic lights of four seconds or less.

A few weeks ago, Armey, R-Texas, blew the whistle on the whole idea of using
machines instead of police officers to catch motorists who run red lights.
Moreover, the yellow light time was suspiciously short in many cases,
seemingly in an attempt to make it harder to stop in time before the light
turns red.

Now, says Armey, there is documented evidence in San Diego confirming that
this is exactly what's happening.
Attorneys with the "Red Light Defense Team" have obtained thousands of
confidential documents from the city's red-light camera contractor during
court proceedings.

"The evidence is clear," says the congressman. "The concern for safety has
given way to a concern for profit. It's all there in black and white."

Here are the criteria used to determine where red-light cameras were to be
placed in the city:

1. "High traffic volume." Heavy traffic ensures a steady stream of profits.

2. The document actually says cameras are to be used where the yellow signal
time is "less than 4 seconds."
Think about that. Is four seconds likely to be sufficient time for you to
come to a complete stop without the risk of being rear-ended? And is that
related to "safety"?

One of the documents actually shows that at one intersection where yellow
light time was increased from 3 to 4.7 seconds, there was a 90 percent
decline in the violations reported.

"The deck is stacked against the driving public," the congressman adds.

San Diego officials recently suspended that city's red-light camera program
after court action brought out the fact that camera sensors were being
manipulated. Or, as Armey puts it, Orwell's cash machine is out of service
in San Diego. If the cops are not on hand to issue the tickets, they have no
way of determining whether the tickets were issued fairly or not.

But the red-light camera is but one instance of machine-based privacy

invasions of motorists. Here's another.
Spying on Rental Cars

Next time you rent a car, you may want to ask the rental agency folks if
they plan on following your every move behind the wheel.
C-Net.com has turned up a case that could determine whether you are entitled
to privacy once you sign on the dotted line and then leave the rental agency
's parking lot.

A Connecticut man is suing the Acme Rent-a-Car after it used GPS (Global
Positioning System) technology to track him and then fined him $450 for
speeding three times.

Most of us assumed handing out traffic tickets was the job of the police.
When and where was a law passed entrusting that responsibility to private
industry?

Whether you know it or not, rental car companies have used the GPS devices
since the mid-1990s, according to the C-Net report.

And there's big money in this privacy-invading cottage industry. "Fleet

management" companies such as AirQ and Fleetrack are selling newer tracking
devices to help companies monitor their vehicles.

The Connecticut case has pitted motorist James Turner against Acme
Rent-a-Car and the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection.

Acme's attorney says this is not about penalizing customers, but about
protecting its cars. "With this device, you can track within a city block
anywhere in the world."

The company itself, according to the story, promotes the GPS and AirQ
ability to track a vehicle's location, when the car crosses into another
country or state, and even disable the car by remote control.

David Sobel, an attorney for the electronic Privacy Center here in

Washington, says the challenge now is to nip this practice in the bud before
it spreads.

Acme plans to abide by the ruling of the state Department of Consumer

Protection "If they say it's not fair, we'll give him his money back," says
the company.

The Privacy Center foundation worries that soon our cell phones will be
tracking us. At some point, someone needs to stand athwart this galloping
trend and say: "Stop. Enough."
========================
spiker mailto:spiker@ev1.net
Defeat photo radar or red light cameras
Tue Jun 26 11:34:00 2001

Tired of Photo Radar? Add PhotoBlock* licence plate covers!

http://www.photoblock.com/

Photo Radar Protection from Photobuster

http://www.photobuster.com/

Photo Radar Protection - Protector

http://radar-detectors.com/protector_overhead.htm

Chameleon Anti-Photo Radar License Cover

http://www.radarscramblers.com/product_antiPhoto.htm

Photo Radar Protection - Photobuster

http://www.laserbusters.com/photobuster.htm

Anti Photo Radar License Plate Cover

http://www.jammersstore.com/anti_photo.htm
====================================
"Operation of a motor vehicle upon public streets and
highways is not a mere privilege but is a right or liberty
protected by the guarantees of Federal and State
constitutions." Adams v. City of Pocatello 416 P2d 46
"The RIGHT of the citizen to DRIVE on the public street
with freedom from police interference, unless he is engaged
in suspicious conduct associated in some manner with
criminality is a FUNDAMENTAL CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHT which must be protected by the courts." People v.
Horton 14 Cal. App. 3rd 667 (1971)
"The right of a citizen to travel upon the public highways
and to transport his property thereon, by horse-drawn
carriage, wagon, or automobile is not a mere privilege which
may be permitted or prohibited at will, but a common right
which he has under his right to life, liberty, and the pursuit
of happiness." Slusher v. Safety Coach Transit Co., 229 Ky
731, 17 SW2d 1012, and affirmed by the Supreme Court in
Thompson v. Smith 154 S.E. 579.
"The license charge imposed by the motor vehicle act is an
excise or privilege tax, established for the purpose of revenue
in order to provide a fund for roads while under the
dominion of the state authorities, it is not a tax imposed as a
rental charge or a toll charge for the use of the highways
owned and controlled by the state." - PG&E v. State
Treasurer, 168 Cal 420.
===============================
DRIVERS LICENSE VS RIGHT TO TRAVEL
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/travel.htm
Driver Licensing vs. the Right to Travel
http://user.icx.net/~drherb/licensing.html
Wood County Texas Courts'
Violation of Soverign Citizen's, Constitutional Right's
http://user.icx.net/~drherb/licensing.html
COMMON LAW VEHICULAR JUDICIAL NOTICE
CONSTITUTIONAL DRIVERS LICENSE
http://justiceprose.8m.com/carl/carl41.html
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
C2-96-1116
http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/archive/ctappub/9702/c2961116.htm
The Sword of Commerce
http://www.proliberty.com/observer/20010213.htm
 Driver's License is a Contract
between you and the Motor Vehicle Department
http://www.svpvril.com/drilic.html
The Right to Travel
vs.
Driver's License Scam
http://www.apfn.org/apfn/drivers-license-scam.htm
==============================
Top of Form

Subscribe to apfn-1

enter email address

Powered by groups.yahoo.com
Bottom of Form

American Patriot Friends Network

"...a network of net workers..."
APFN IS NOT A BUSINESS
APFN IS SUPPORTED BY "FREE WILL" GIFT/DONATIONS
Without Justice, there is JUST_US!
http://www.apfn.org

APFN Sitemap
APFN Message Board
APFN Contents Page
APFN Home Page
E-Mail: APFN@apfn.org

Last updated