A Brief History
Today, November 4, 2014, voters in Cleveland, Ohio have the opportunity to vote against one of the more Orwellian aspects of modern society: red-light cameras.
Digging Deeper
As the son of a former police captain who is adamantly opposed to these eye sores, I am briefly presenting some of the many reasons to vote “Yes” on Issue 35 in today’s election in Cleveland, Ohio and “Yes” on Issue 99 in today’s election in Maple Heights, Ohio.
The question on the Cleveland ballot asks, “Shall the Charter of the City of Cleveland be amended to add new Chapter 40, Section 203, which provides that the City shall not use any traffic law photo-monitoring device for the enforcement of a qualified traffic law violation, unless a law enforcement officer is present at the location of the device and personally issues the ticket to the alleged violator at the time and location of the violation?” As the League of Women Voters explains, “This City Charter amendment would prohibit traffic cameras and the fining of those caught speeding by them, unless a traffic police officer is present to pull over and ticket the offending driver on the spot. A yes vote means you want to get rid of traffic cameras.”
The question on the Maple Heights ballots asks, “Shall the Charter of the City of Maple Heights be amended to add new Article XXII, which provides that the City shall not use any traffic law photo-monitoring device for the enforcement of a qualified traffic law violation, unless a law enforcement officer is present at the location of the device and personally issues the ticket to the alleged violator at the time and location of the violation; and that the City shall not enter into, renew, amend, modify, or make any payment under a contract with a vendor for traffic law photo-monitoring devices or services if the contract involves payment to the vendor that is contingent upon the number of tickets issued or the amount of fines levied or; and that qualified traffic violations shall be tried only before a judge in either municipal or common pleas court, and the accused will be afforded all rights then generally afforded to defendants in criminal cases under the constitutions and laws of the United States and the State of Ohio?”
According to Cleveland.com, voters should support these measure, because city “residents also use these roads, and all drivers are inconvenienced by speed traps which indiscriminately penalize everyone who inadvertently may stray over the speed limit in the wrong spot at the wrong time. Cameras are about raising money, not safety. Officers in patrol cars are a more effective deterrent to speeding.” Indeed, please read numerous studies that prove red light cameras actually cause more accidents. Moreover, in various locations, the wicked supporters of these diabolical devices are doing such underhanded tactics as decreasing the time traffic lights are yellow (below federal recommendations, mind you) in order to increase the number of red lights! They have also caused other bizarre nightmares for innocent victims…
Not surprisingly, various groups have taken to the internet protesting the traffic cameras, including the Cleveland’s Camera Removal Team and Ban the Camera. We, History and Headlines writers Major Dan and Dr. Zar, urge all of our readers in Cleveland and Maple Heights who are voters to vote “Yes” on Issue 35 in Cleveland and “Yes” on Issue 99 in Maple Heights when you go to the polls today! Thank you for making Ohio a better place!
Question for students (and subscribers): What can you do to help ban red-light cameras? Please let us know in the comments section below this article.
If you liked this article and would like to receive notification of new articles, please feel welcome to subscribe to History and Headlines by liking us on Facebook and becoming one of our patrons!
Your readership is much appreciated!
Historical Evidence
For more information, please read…
RLCT Publishing. SHOOT BACK! How To Fight A Red Light Camera Ticket. Vision Group Management, LLC, 2010.
