Speed cameras - a revenue-extracting scam

Since I can't keep my comments to five minutes and the Fruitland City Council member I'm watching right now is basically feeding us a line of bullshit, here is the REAL truth: it's all about the Benjamins.

First of all, these cameras aren't necessarily accurate. Secondly, they are rife for abuse as "school zones" magically expand to areas well beyond the posted zones.

But the scenarios presented seem to ignore some other realities.

To start, let's assume the cameras are vehicle-mounted. How much cost will it be to send out a deputy to fetch the vehicle and bring it back to the home base? Someone in Fruitland has to do this, but the county will have a much larger area to cover. Meanwhile, static cameras are subject to vandalism.

Secondly, the target is certain to be a moving target. Right now it's 12 miles per hour over, in school zones during certain time periods. But once the camel's nose under the tent it's certain that the usage will be expanded, the allowable overage will be reduced, and the fine will be increased - particularly when revenues fall short of expectations.

Normally I agree with Mike Lewis, but he's wrong on this one. Hopefully the County Council resists the temptation to allow Big Brother a little larger slice of our life.

Final thoughts: Yes, our County Council was gutless and rolled over. But here's the question that should be paramount:

If the concept of safety in school zones is so important, why aren't deputies and officers enforcing the law there on a daily basis despite the fact the county gets nothing from those fines? Since they don't currently make this a part of their daily routine, it seems to me that placing a camera there now, when a financial incentive is being dangled in front of them, shows the real reason they're backing it.