Comments for BanCams.com End Red Light Speed Cameras http://bancams.com Washington State Tue, 10 Apr 2012 20:07:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.2 Comment on Voters say NO to Cameras in 3 Washington cities! by madowner3204 http://bancams.com/voters-say-no-to-cameras-in-3-wa-cities/comment-page-1/#comment-2563 madowner3204 Tue, 10 Apr 2012 20:07:27 +0000 http://bancams.com/?p=1645#comment-2563 I got a citation in the mail yesterday for a red light running on Mar27. I recieved it 17 days after the infraction was to have been commited. One I wasn't the driver, but I was cited because I'm the first owner listed on the title of the truck. If you ask me this is "BS"!!!!!! If you can't pinpoint the correct driver then why just pick the owner of the car to cite. I will end up paying the ticket because it was my husband driving, but the ticket should have been given to him not me, his name is on the title too, so why pinpoint me. They claim it won't go on they driving record and won't effect my insurance rate, but it is still BS to cite me just because my name appears on the title first." Improve the camera shots so you can get picture of the driver or get rid of the cameras completely!!!!" This kind of BS causes fights to breakout. You either eat the cost or turn the other person driving in. TOTAL BS!!!!!!!! If you ask me the cameras are just another way for the goverment to spend money and let BIG BROTHER Spy on people. I got a citation in the mail yesterday for a red light running on Mar27. I recieved it 17 days after the infraction was to have been commited. One I wasn't the driver, but I was cited because I'm the first owner listed on the title of the truck. If you ask me this is "BS"!!!!!! If you can't pinpoint the correct driver then why just pick the owner of the car to cite. I will end up paying the ticket because it was my husband driving, but the ticket should have been given to him not me, his name is on the title too, so why pinpoint me. They claim it won't go on they driving record and won't effect my insurance rate, but it is still BS to cite me just because my name appears on the title first." Improve the camera shots so you can get picture of the driver or get rid of the cameras completely!!!!" This kind of BS causes fights to breakout. You either eat the cost or turn the other person driving in. TOTAL BS!!!!!!!! If you ask me the cameras are just another way for the goverment to spend money and let BIG BROTHER Spy on people.

]]> Comment on Election Day is Tuesday! by Improperuse http://bancams.com/election-day-is-tuesday/comment-page-1/#comment-2386 Improperuse Tue, 14 Feb 2012 01:42:41 +0000 http://bancams.com/?p=1639#comment-2386 Are there any actions to take cameras out of Pierce county. This law is being abused by some of the courts. I'm ready to sign a petition. Ken. Are there any actions to take cameras out of Pierce county. This law is being abused by some of the courts. I'm ready to sign a petition. Ken.

]]> Comment on Puyallup has Red Light Cameras that are breaking the law! by Guy_Fawks http://bancams.com/puyallup-has-red-light-cameras-that-are-breaking-the-law/comment-page-1/#comment-2358 Guy_Fawks Mon, 06 Feb 2012 08:04:41 +0000 http://bancams.com/?p=1013#comment-2358 I just joined this because I just went through the intersection of 31st. AVE and Meridian about 15 minutes ago when I saw a flash. The sad thing was that I cleared the intersection. I was pissed, because I found out that the ticket was $124 on the Puyallup city website. That is a lot of money to me. Luckly, it will not go on my record and the images will go to a processing station to be looked at but I am still a little ticked. If the camera showed that I was in the wrong, I was going to go ahead and pay the ticket anyway until I saw this. The fact that Puyallup illegally placed the cameras at the intersection made me reconsider. I will now definitely challenge the ticket. Yes it is just a red light ticket but $124 is still $124. I just joined this because I just went through the intersection of 31st. AVE and Meridian about 15 minutes ago when I saw a flash. The sad thing was that I cleared the intersection. I was pissed, because I found out that the ticket was $124 on the Puyallup city website. That is a lot of money to me. Luckly, it will not go on my record and the images will go to a processing station to be looked at but I am still a little ticked. If the camera showed that I was in the wrong, I was going to go ahead and pay the ticket anyway until I saw this. The fact that Puyallup illegally placed the cameras at the intersection made me reconsider. I will now definitely challenge the ticket. Yes it is just a red light ticket but $124 is still $124.

]]> Comment on Puyallup has Red Light Cameras that are breaking the law! by law1204 http://bancams.com/puyallup-has-red-light-cameras-that-are-breaking-the-law/comment-page-1/#comment-2198 law1204 Tue, 20 Dec 2011 19:17:22 +0000 http://bancams.com/?p=1013#comment-2198 The wording of the RCW does NOT define 31st (a collector) as an arterial. What it says is that the transportation boards, cities, AND counties all have to get together and develop criteria that designates an arterial, and that said bodies can define any street as an arterial that they want to. But, BUT, apparently the city of Puyallup didn't get the memo, which they should have if they had been involved with the designation process (as they should have been) that made 31st an arterial. It would have been reflected on their map if 31st had been made an arterial according to the process defined in the RCW. It's not designated as an arterial on any map. Ergo, 31st is not an arterial. If the judge interpreted RCW 47.26.090 that 31st is an arterial, he apparently can't read or has his head in his ass. Sorry I'm so late with this response, but if this happens to anyone else, appeal appeal appeal. The wording of the RCW does NOT define 31st (a collector) as an arterial. What it says is that the transportation boards, cities, AND counties all have to get together and develop criteria that designates an arterial, and that said bodies can define any street as an arterial that they want to. But, BUT, apparently the city of Puyallup didn't get the memo, which they should have if they had been involved with the designation process (as they should have been) that made 31st an arterial. It would have been reflected on their map if 31st had been made an arterial according to the process defined in the RCW. It's not designated as an arterial on any map. Ergo, 31st is not an arterial. If the judge interpreted RCW 47.26.090 that 31st is an arterial, he apparently can't read or has his head in his ass. Sorry I'm so late with this response, but if this happens to anyone else, appeal appeal appeal.

]]> Comment on ATS Gets Caught Faking Citizen Comments by TruThor13 http://bancams.com/ats-gets-caught-faking-citizen-comments/comment-page-1/#comment-2132 TruThor13 Tue, 06 Dec 2011 19:22:03 +0000 http://bancams.com/?p=1509#comment-2132 I beat a red light camera ticket on appeal (CITY OF DAVENPORT vs Kenneth Tennant) Then I filed suit in US Dist Ct, Southern Iowa (3:10-cv-144, Tennant vs Anderson, et al) US Dist Ct "Judge" Charles R Wolle dismissed the Scott Co "Judges" because he claims judges are above the law. I appealed to the 8th Cir Ct of Appls (case no. 11-2663) and on Dec. 5, 2001 "Judges" MURPHY, ARNOLD & BENTON ruled in favor of their lower court cohorts (FRAUDS under color of law) They willfully & wantonly violated their oaths of office, prosecuting from the bench in a case where they lacked jurisdiction. According to CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS vs ASTINGER (Iowa 2000) ALL criminal cases Must have a VERIFIABLE COMPLAINT on record. Essential elements of a VC is a claim of INJURY or DAMAGES. They did NOT have this. Officer Clif Anderson, the ONLY witness for the CITY testified that he was neither injured or damaged as a result of the action(s) he claim against me (I had protective license plate covers that he took without warrant and has refused to return despite their loss in court) This was a "red light camera" "violation" charge. You Tube: Legal Land, click Mark Stevens.- Kenneth Tennant, 563-355-7073 I beat a red light camera ticket on appeal (CITY OF DAVENPORT vs Kenneth Tennant) Then I filed suit in US Dist Ct, Southern Iowa (3:10-cv-144, Tennant vs Anderson, et al) US Dist Ct "Judge" Charles R Wolle dismissed the Scott Co "Judges" because he claims judges are above the law. I appealed to the 8th Cir Ct of Appls (case no. 11-2663) and on Dec. 5, 2001 "Judges" MURPHY, ARNOLD & BENTON ruled in favor of their lower court cohorts (FRAUDS under color of law) They willfully & wantonly violated their oaths of office, prosecuting from the bench in a case where they lacked jurisdiction. According to CITY OF CEDAR RAPIDS vs ASTINGER (Iowa 2000) ALL criminal cases Must have a VERIFIABLE COMPLAINT on record. Essential elements of a VC is a claim of INJURY or DAMAGES. They did NOT have this. Officer Clif Anderson, the ONLY witness for the CITY testified that he was neither injured or damaged as a result of the action(s) he claim against me (I had protective license plate covers that he took without warrant and has refused to return despite their loss in court) This was a "red light camera" "violation" charge. You Tube: Legal Land, click Mark Stevens.- Kenneth Tennant, 563-355-7073

]]> Comment on Red Light/Speed Camera Hearings TODAY! by John Cox http://bancams.com/red-lightspeed-camera-hearings-today/comment-page-1/#comment-2129 John Cox Tue, 06 Dec 2011 12:22:27 +0000 http://bancams.com/?p=1238#comment-2129 Hah, Italy demonstrators rally against Berlusconi Hah, Italy demonstrators rally against Berlusconi

]]> Comment on How to fight tickets by johnny_d http://bancams.com/how-to-fight-tickets/comment-page-3/#comment-2044 johnny_d Thu, 10 Nov 2011 06:42:05 +0000 http://bancams.com/?page_id=226#comment-2044 I'm really quite surprised that no incidents of camera destruction have been reported around Washington yet. I mean, in Europe, it's a common occurrence to see a group of blokes taking an old tire, pouring some gas in it, and slinging it over a speed cam, lighting it with a burning stick as they go. Once that tire gets going, nobody, and I mean nobody, not even your local fire department, can put it out until it's good and done burning...by which time the camera is utterly destroyed. Do that enough times, and the camera companies will just refuse to do business with your particular city anymore, as their loss of assets will be too high to justify the extortion...I mean revenue...stream. Of course, this is America, where it seems the police are becoming more of an occupying army than a means to support fair justice in enforcement. The story in these comments of a guy going to a police dept and having a cop put his hand on his gun is just...a pathetic demonstration of just policing in action. Pathetic is the only word I can come up with for it. I'm really quite surprised that no incidents of camera destruction have been reported around Washington yet. I mean, in Europe, it's a common occurrence to see a group of blokes taking an old tire, pouring some gas in it, and slinging it over a speed cam, lighting it with a burning stick as they go. Once that tire gets going, nobody, and I mean nobody, not even your local fire department, can put it out until it's good and done burning…by which time the camera is utterly destroyed.

Do that enough times, and the camera companies will just refuse to do business with your particular city anymore, as their loss of assets will be too high to justify the extortion…I mean revenue…stream.

Of course, this is America, where it seems the police are becoming more of an occupying army than a means to support fair justice in enforcement. The story in these comments of a guy going to a police dept and having a cop put his hand on his gun is just…a pathetic demonstration of just policing in action. Pathetic is the only word I can come up with for it.

]]> Comment on Lynnwood breaks state law and improperly uses camera footage by jersom http://bancams.com/lynnwood-breaks-state-law-and-improperly-uses-camera-footage/comment-page-1/#comment-2041 jersom Wed, 09 Nov 2011 08:15:20 +0000 http://bancams.com/?p=1593#comment-2041 Red-light cams first came into use in the early 1990s. Since then, their reputation has grown with municipalities worldwide. The cams are made to take a picture of vehicles crossing an intersection on a red light. Citations are then issues and mailed out the vehicle's registered proprietor. Opponents say they invade on privacy and they are more about profits than public security. Fans say that they are a cost-effective way to keep drivers in check. I read this here: <a title="Do red-light cameras put profit over public safety?" href="http://www.cardealexpert.com/news-information/auto-news/red-light-cameras-profit-vs-safety/">Do red-light cameras put profit over public safety?</a> Red-light cams first came into use in the early 1990s. Since then, their reputation has grown with municipalities worldwide. The cams are made to take a picture of vehicles crossing an intersection on a red light. Citations are then issues and mailed out the vehicle's registered proprietor. Opponents say they invade on privacy and they are more about profits than public security. Fans say that they are a cost-effective way to keep drivers in check. I read this here: <a title="Do red-light cameras put profit over public safety?" href="http://www.cardealexpert.com/news-information/auto-news/red-light-cameras-profit-vs-safety/">Do red-light cameras put profit over public safety?

]]> Comment on Emails Reveal Lynnwood’s Ticket Camera Dirty Laundry by sukiusa http://bancams.com/emails-reveal-lynnwoods-ticket-camera-dirty-laundry/comment-page-1/#comment-1975 sukiusa Mon, 10 Oct 2011 02:10:10 +0000 http://bancams.com/?p=1586#comment-1975 "Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security." Ben Franklin "Those who give up their liberty for more security neither deserve liberty nor security."
Ben Franklin

]]> Comment on Puyallup has Red Light Cameras that are breaking the law! by mmagruder315 http://bancams.com/puyallup-has-red-light-cameras-that-are-breaking-the-law/comment-page-1/#comment-1560 mmagruder315 Thu, 07 Jul 2011 10:57:54 +0000 http://bancams.com/?p=1013#comment-1560 I received a ticket, and took all this info you all have provided into court. The judge read RCW 47.26.090, as The City of Puyallup's response. It sucks, but when they have it in an RCW saying a collector street is an arterial, what can you do? RCW 47.26.090 "Arterial" defined. The term "arterial" as used in this chapter means any state highway, county road, or city street, in an urban area, that is functionally classified as a principal arterial, minor arterial, or collector street by the department in cooperation with the board, regional transportation planning organizations, cities, and counties. The board shall develop criteria and procedures for designating arterials in the incorporated cities and towns lying outside urban areas. I received a ticket, and took all this info you all have provided into court. The judge read RCW 47.26.090, as The City of Puyallup's response. It sucks, but when they have it in an RCW saying a collector street is an arterial, what can you do?

RCW 47.26.090
"Arterial" defined.

The term "arterial" as used in this chapter means any state highway, county road, or city street, in an urban area, that is functionally classified as a principal arterial, minor arterial, or collector street by the department in cooperation with the board, regional transportation planning organizations, cities, and counties. The board shall develop criteria and procedures for designating arterials in the incorporated cities and towns lying outside urban areas.

]]>