Revenue generatin' cameras

Davenport's installation of surveillance cameras at several intersections and plans to install many more have been getting a lot of coverage lately.

The first cameras were installed under the premise of preventing people from running red lights. But it's a little more draconian than that. They are now ticketing anyone who doesn't come to a complete, dead stop, even before turning right on a red. This accounts for over 70% of the tickets issued, which are around $45 a pop.

This is ridiculous, and there is data from some pro-motorist groups that show that accidents actually increase at intersections where the red light cameras are installed, as the number of rear-end accidents go up when people suddenly stop on yellow lights or when turning right on red.

But perhaps most ridiculous is the fact that some Davenport alderman initially proposed the police issue $45 tickets to people for going as little as ONE MILE AN HOUR OVER THE SPEED LIMIT.

Thankfully, an alderman who had gotten a ticket for not stopping completely before making a right turn on red stepped in to provide some sanity.

The council approved an amendment from Ald. Bob McGivern, 6th Ward, to set a $5 fine for those going one to seven mph over the speed limit. A previous vote had set a $45 fine for those caught breaking the limit by one to 10 mph.

"Getting ticketed for one, two, three or four miles per hour over the speed limit isn't grounded in reality," Ald. McGivern said.

Ald. Ray Ambrose, 4th Ward, opposed the lower fine, saying he didn't want to "appease ... those who like to break the law."

Police Chief Mike Bladel said, in two other cities with the speed cameras, 85 percent of tickets were issued to drivers going 11 to 15 mph over the speed limit.

How can a person seriously argue that police should ticket people going 1 or 2 miles a mile over the limit or else we'd be "appeasing" lawbreakers?

Thankfully, Alderman McGivern had the good sense to step in to propose a sane policy, though I think eliminating a fine altogether for going 1 - 7 miles an hour over the limit would be more proper. I find it absolutely incredible that there were actually alderman who argued against the proposal and actually thought people should get $45 fines for going as little as a mile an hour over the limit. They represent what is so messed up with primarily right-wing, uptight, and puritanical politicians. If government were left up to them, and these days, it largely is, the country would turn into Afghanistan under the Taliban, with zero tolerance for any number of perceived misbehaviors.

And of course, underlying all of this folly is the simple desire for more and more income for the cops and the city. Davenport has issued more than 3,000 tickets using the cameras in the past year, generating thousands in revenue. And of course, once other cities see that their counterparts are raking in the dough, they'll be hustling to follow suit.

These cameras are nothing more than another revenue generating scheme with which the city hopes to cash in. It's reckless, intrusive, and likely will lead to more accidents as people watch their speedometers instead of the road, and come to sudden unexpected stops.

What do you think of the idea of replacing cops with cameras?

From stories in the Q.C. Times and from Q.C. Online.