“For The Children” Update
Posted on December 19, 2014
Anyone with a firing neuron or two knows that red light (and speed) cameras are a simple way to extract much needed revenue from the serfs without having to technically raise taxes. Apparently it took a study to prove this fact:
“Emanuel has credited the cameras for a 47 percent reduction in dangerous right-angle, or “T-bone,” crashes. But the Tribune study, which accounted for declining accident rates in recent years as well as other confounding factors, found cameras reduced right-angle crashes that caused injuries by just 15 percent.
At the same time, the study calculated a corresponding 22 percent increase in rear-end crashes that caused injuries, illustrating a trade-off between the cameras’ costs and benefits.”
A reduction of 15% here coupled with a rise of 22% there means more of what is supposed to be prevented is happening, right?
“So the question now is: If we eliminate a certain type of collision and increase the other and overall it stays the same, is there an argument that it is fair to go with the program?”
Fair? Who gives a shit about fair. It’s always about the money, always:
“…350 red light cameras and raised more than $500 million in $100 tickets since 2002.”
Mo’ money! Mo’ money! Mo’ money!
Keep it short and to the point. Name calling and similar stupidity will be deleted. If you insist on writing several paragraphs, start your own blog.