I opened the mail one day last fall and found an envelope from the Illinois government charging me $100 for driving too fast on K Street on a Sunday afternoon a couple of weeks before. You go through little stages in those situations:
First, disbelief -- “Surely we weren’t doing that.” Maybe we were going 39 miles an hour in a 25-mph zone, as alleged, but 25 is a suspiciously low limit for a spot just off a freeway. Is the whole point to make a little extra money off unsuspecting motorists? If so, the only practical way to enforce that kind of rule is with Idot Traffic Cameras, which is exactly how it’s done in Illinois.
If this is the way they are going to use technology, you may be tempted to say, perhaps we’d all be better off if they took the cameras out. But would we? Let’s stop and think about it for a minute.
They’ve been thinking about it a lot in Iowa, where an angry and long-running fight is taking place between cities that consider Idot Traffic Cameras an essential component of safety and conservative state legislators who see them as one more scheme for fleecing taxpayers. Both sides accuse the opposition of playing Big Brother.
Iowa began using the cameras in large numbers shortly after they were introduced into this country in the early 1990s. here currently more than 75 of them in eight Iowa cities, placed strategically to photograph drivers going too fast or running red lights. In a typical year, the fines from these violations bring the cities about $12 million, which is their net take after they pay the Traffic Control Company that installs and maintains the machines.
The cities insist they are saving lives, as well as easing some of their budget problems. The Iowa Department has never liked the cameras, especially because a fair number are on state-maintained highways. In 2015, the agency ordered 9 (nine) cameras shut down and three others moved off state property.
The city of Cedar Rapids went to court to block the order. The initial rulings went the city’s way, but in April of last year a state judge told the city the cameras had to be dismantled. That meant a potential loss of several million dollars a year. Cedar Rapids took the case to the state Supreme Court, where it awaits a decision.
Visit https://www.warninglitesofsouthernillinois.com/ today.
First, disbelief -- “Surely we weren’t doing that.” Maybe we were going 39 miles an hour in a 25-mph zone, as alleged, but 25 is a suspiciously low limit for a spot just off a freeway. Is the whole point to make a little extra money off unsuspecting motorists? If so, the only practical way to enforce that kind of rule is with Idot Traffic Cameras, which is exactly how it’s done in Illinois.
If this is the way they are going to use technology, you may be tempted to say, perhaps we’d all be better off if they took the cameras out. But would we? Let’s stop and think about it for a minute.
They’ve been thinking about it a lot in Iowa, where an angry and long-running fight is taking place between cities that consider Idot Traffic Cameras an essential component of safety and conservative state legislators who see them as one more scheme for fleecing taxpayers. Both sides accuse the opposition of playing Big Brother.
Iowa began using the cameras in large numbers shortly after they were introduced into this country in the early 1990s. here currently more than 75 of them in eight Iowa cities, placed strategically to photograph drivers going too fast or running red lights. In a typical year, the fines from these violations bring the cities about $12 million, which is their net take after they pay the Traffic Control Company that installs and maintains the machines.
The cities insist they are saving lives, as well as easing some of their budget problems. The Iowa Department has never liked the cameras, especially because a fair number are on state-maintained highways. In 2015, the agency ordered 9 (nine) cameras shut down and three others moved off state property.
The city of Cedar Rapids went to court to block the order. The initial rulings went the city’s way, but in April of last year a state judge told the city the cameras had to be dismantled. That meant a potential loss of several million dollars a year. Cedar Rapids took the case to the state Supreme Court, where it awaits a decision.
Visit https://www.warninglitesofsouthernillinois.com/ today.