Law enforcement opposes I-985

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

One of the most recent groups to oppose I-985 is the Washington Association of Sheriffs and Police Chiefs, whose board unanimously voted to oppose the measure Oct. 21.

"Granted, we were latecomers to the party," said the association's executive director, Don Pierce, adding that the group seldom issues political endorsements. Pierce said law-enforcement officials worry Eyman's HOV-lane policy could make traffic congestion worse. But their major objection is the provision to divert "red-light" revenue to the state traffic fund.

"This is a way of killing programs that have proven very effective," Pierce said. In cities now using the red-light cameras, a substantial part of the money collected in fines goes to operate the equipment itself -- money a city wouldn't have if it were required to turn the revenue over to the state, Pierce said.

Eyman says if cities really believe the red-light cameras save lives, they should find another way to finance them. I-985, he said, simply removes the "profit motive" from the cameras.

What the fuck is your problem Timmy? Did you get multiple tickets for running red lights?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/trafficcongestioninitiative/2008328851_hovintiative30m.html

[PSPS]

1. I agree with Eyeman on the red-light cameras

They aren't there to reduce accidents. They're there simply to produce revenue, with a cut given to the private company that operates them. This is wrong. Private companies shouldn't be involved with law enforcement and shouldn't be profiting from it.

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

2. Are you serious?

I suppose you think condoms cause AIDS and global warming's a hoax?

As one who was T-boned by an asshole who ran a red light I'm in favor of them. It's pretty easy to deal with red light cameras. Don't run red lights.

Law enforcement favors them because it frees police to deal with other problems.