PDA

View Full Version : Traffic Cameras & Toll Way Cameras / Stealth-Counter Measures from Detection!



Schreck
November 14th, 2004, 12:50 PM
Phantomplate.com
A coating or spray to put on the plates so when the Flash goes off it leaves your plates undetectable. Putting some on the bike and car plates. I see cameras everywhere at every intersection and been doing some research. Many states are using this tax collecting method to get anyone running REDS..Don't get caught if your not willing to pay the price.

Radarbusters.com
Digital photos don't use flash so I think Houston might be on track with this equipment already.
Blinder Laser Jammers for bike are $349.95 (m-20)

I don't have or expect to get anymore tickets for next year. I do plan on riding all winter and will be equipt. :D

VFRacer-R
November 14th, 2004, 02:06 PM
Funny, coming from someone that wants to be a Sherriff's Deputy that you are trying to lobby everyone to buy something to break the law with... :rolleyes:

Schreck
November 14th, 2004, 05:51 PM
Funny, that you mention that since most the cops I know talk about what people do to use counter measures. Tom what I do is my business and who said all COPS are saints. I'm sure you know most of them really report all there earnings at the end of the year. tongue.gif
If you check out the website Radarbusters.com
you'll see that 3 DPS officers are getting paid to test equipment.

[ November 14, 2004, 17:56: Message edited by: Tony Schreck ]

The Big Spank Daddy
November 14th, 2004, 05:54 PM
Hmmmmm, breaking the law? Maybe we need clarification from one of our experts. From my understanding the plate must be readable from 200 feet(?). Last time I read the text about plates I don't recall seeing anything about "The plate must be visible to photo taking equipment."

Anyone know for sure what the actual law is?

Schreck
November 14th, 2004, 05:58 PM
How can you break the law if the plate is still visible? Its only the Flash that causes the counter effect in the photo created. This has nothing to do with the law. tongue.gif

Paul Sonderfan
November 14th, 2004, 08:37 PM
The new law that covers license plate frames also mentions, and I'm paraphrasing, anything that covers or restricts visibility of the plate. I'm going to go out on a limb and say that it's NOT illegal because it's a scam and it doesn't work. tongue.gif Laser jammers, yes; license plate sprays, no. But that just my opinion, I could be wrong. :rolleyes:

rtbain
November 15th, 2004, 05:37 AM
I called my brother-in-law (retired-DPS) who checked with current officers. In their unofficial opinion it may be illegal, but very hard to prove. Seems that if a light is shinned on the plate it shines much brighter than normal. Depending on the officer this could be construed as a ploy to make the plate unreadable.

Since the plate is on the outside of the vehicle there is no way to prove you are the one who sprayed it. This is unlike covers where it is obvious (or should be) that the cover has been installed to a reasonable person.

My gripe about tickets by camera is that they are usually run by a contractor. The contractor takes a cut of tickets issued. In my mind this is a clear conflict of interest. The spray is an affirmative defense against this conflict.

As far as pointing fingers at potential officers who bend the law in their favor, well all I have to say is how often do officers use their badge to get a little professional courtesy?

If you want a win-win situation I suggest joining the 100 Club. The club was established to help the families of fallen firefighters and polices officers. They also provide other benefits such as help with higher education.

Having a 100 Club sticker is no grantee that you will not get a ticket. That is not its intent. But it doesn’t **** the police officer off either. And most tickets start with the initial offense of POP (pissin’ off the police).

If you decide to join please do so for the right reason. To help those who have fallen while trying to protect us.

In Houston:
http://www.the100club.com/

There are several other clubs around the state. Do a google for your area.

And yes, I am a lifetime member. I joined out of the immense respect I have for my brother-in-law.

If you want to bad mouth a particular cop go ahead. If you want to paint all cops with a bad image please don’t do it around me.

VFRacer-R
November 15th, 2004, 07:34 AM
This:
Many states are using this tax collecting method to get anyone running REDS..Don't get caught if your not willing to pay the price.
Is intending to break the law. You are saying that in order to run a red light, and NOT get caught, use this product you are endorsing.
Not much grey area there... :mad:
Why not just abide the law and not run the red?
If you do get caught, and you feel that it is not justfied, fight it in court.
I don't think that the cameras are a good idea, I don't like them either.
To boot, I am pretty sure that the camera not only takes a picture of you, but also the light you ran and the time of day.

tmtaz21
November 15th, 2004, 05:12 PM
I agree w/ Tommy, if you don't break the law you don't have to worry about getting a ticket. Tony, didn't you lose your truck and you and your family get injuried because someone ran a red light? Funny that you are now avocating (sp?) using a product that helps cover your plate so you can run lights and toll booths with minimum risk of getting caught.
I also didn't know this club was about ways of getting around the traffic laws. If it has become that, maybe I need to reconsider my membership.

Pete
November 15th, 2004, 06:34 PM
Where are all of these cameras at? As far as I know there aren’t any besides the ones on the toll roads. They and red light cameras don’t bother me because I don’t mind paying the toll and I don’t run red lights. I would be whole heartily against any type of traffic camera though, if a precedent is set for using them for red lights it wouldn’t be long after until we turn into the UK. Anyone that reads UK bike mags know what I’m talking about. Under those circumstances I’d be using every tool possible to break the law. For now I’ll just keep an eye on my Passport 8500 and utilize lawyer Sprecher when needed. :D

The Big Spank Daddy
November 15th, 2004, 09:28 PM
Good one Troy :eek:

I can't say that I'm in favor of camera's giving me a ticket........but the point is that if your not breaking the law then you got nothing to worry about.

VFRacer-R
November 15th, 2004, 10:16 PM
Originally posted by T. Tyrrell:
avocating (sp?) Advocating- right Scott? :D

[ November 15, 2004, 22:17: Message edited by: Tommyboy ]

rtbain
November 16th, 2004, 05:26 AM
Something missing in this debate is the rules are sometimes changed to enhance revenue. It has been shown that the yellow light is often shortened to increase the likelihood of catching someone running a red.

Anytime a private contractor becomes involved in enforcing the law the innocent do indeed have something to fear. Corporations are well known for changing the rules to enhance revenue.

I know of at least one person in this debate who was let off a ticket because they were riding with an officer. They were riding a bike with out of date plates and inspection sticker. If they had not been riding with an off duty officer they would have been busted.

So this, “don’t break the law and you have nothing to fear” comes from the same person who used a get out of jail free when caught doing wrong. Hypocrisy or just “professional courtesy”?

Please don’t misunderstand, if you break the law and get caught you have little right to complain. But utilizing a private company to “enforce the law” i.e. levy fines is just plain wrong, In my mind civil disobedience using devices to circumvent this activity is entirely justified.

REAL cops should enforce the law, not a machine owned by a company who profits from the fines levied. Machines are not intended to enforce the law, they are intended to increase revenue.

gsalisbury
November 16th, 2004, 09:49 AM
It has been shown that the yellow light is often shortened to increase the likelihood of catching someone running a red.
and if it doesn't meet the minimum time required by DOT and you can demonstrate that a traffic impact study was not completed prior to changing it below said mandated minimum and you bring proof of time samples for said light during similar time/traffic patterns at the time one receives the citation, you can get said citation for running a red light dismissed in the City of Houston Municipal Court.

... or so I've heard.

AaronEustace
November 16th, 2004, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by G-Man:
and if it doesn't meet the minimum time required by DOT and you can demonstrate that a traffic impact study was not completed prior to changing it below said mandated minimum and you bring proof of time samples for said light during similar time/traffic patterns at the time one receives the citation, you can get said citation for running a red light dismissed in the City of Houston Municipal Court.

... or so I've heard. ...sounds like a lot of hassle. Somebody pass the paint can.
:D

Sean Smith
November 16th, 2004, 11:02 AM
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by T. Tyrrell:
avocating (sp?)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Advocating- right Scott? :D Uh oh, Scott will not be pleased with you Tom! :eek: :D

[ November 16, 2004, 11:03: Message edited by: Sean Smith ]

Paul Sonderfan
November 16th, 2004, 03:26 PM
Red light cameras are not a new topic in Texas, but everytime they have been brought in for testing, they have been rejected for use here. Maybe it's our "pioneer" spirit, but no one wants "big brother" watching them. That being said, I HATE red light runners. I have kids and a wife who drive and they don't always look both ways before entering a green light intersection. I also have a neighbor whose daughter was killed by a drunk running a red light. Also, we as bike riders are especially vulnerable. As much as I would like to see something done to stop it, I DO NOT trust a contractor with a vested interest to police it. As cynical as it may sound, those of us who drive in the city (Houston) can see where the police emphasis is; Laser traps where 3 to 5 officers can sit under a bridge and and have the offenders lined up for tickets for anything more than "5 over". Revenue generation plain and simple! Who can blame the officers when the administration had several officers placed on "**** duty" last month for "lack of performance"(in reality, not writing enough tickets). My police sargent friend says that the Camaro officers who wrote me up 2 months ago write aprox. 1400 tickets a month. :eek: You can't do that policing red lights.
So,Tony, go ahead and buy your spray, but don't run any red lights,or we'll just have to kill you to make for the flawed system. tongue.gif
I'm not sure I had a point here, but I DID feel a need to rant. smile.gif

The Big Spank Daddy
November 18th, 2004, 07:47 PM
I saw a deal on channel 13 about a year ago where they said that 1/3 of all tickets get dismissed for various reasons such as DD. 1/3 of the tickets go uncollected and turned to warrants and the final 1/3 get paid.

This subject was about how the City is loosing money writing tickets and where considering having an "outside" contractor take over "collecting" the 1/3 that turns to warrants and uncollected. I may be wrong but I believe they said that traffic warrants total in the "millions". Something like 3 million which equated to like 330 million dollars.

rtbain
November 19th, 2004, 04:25 AM
Running red lights is not only illegal, it’s stupid. It endangers yourself and innocent people. Few will argue with that point.

But using machines to “enforce the law” is a sham. Their only reason for being is to enhance revenue. The contractors running those machines have a clear conflict of interest in stacking the deck in their favor to enhance their revenue as well as the city’s.

I respectfully disagree with the statement that “the innocent have nothing to fear”. The current traffic courts system is not about justice, it’s about revenue. It about the prosecutors win/loss record. It’s about money. Its about enhancing the prosecutors and judges reputations and chances for advancement.

In contrast I understand the majority of field officers view. They have seen way too much carnage and are trying to make a difference. Granted there are a few who like writing tickets to either get their jollies or suck up to their superiors. I believe these are in the minority.

I don’t think Tony is advocating running red lights or busting the toll both. His argument seems to be against the machines doing to work of law enforcement officers. I am in full agreement with this statement.

And before we go too far a field with the “lets obey the traffic laws” how about remembering our SMR pace. We begin every ride knowing full well that we intend to break traffic laws.

Schreck
November 19th, 2004, 05:01 AM
Randy, your absolutely correct! I'm not advocating running red lights, tollways, breaking the LAW, Making FIRES between fellow TSBA members.
Just let you all know that there is another Revenue Generator out there and to be prepared for the consequence. :cool:

VFRacer-R
November 19th, 2004, 10:14 AM
Please


Let


This


Thread


Die!


:D

Sean Smith
November 19th, 2004, 11:33 AM
You guys could have it worse.
http://sk1pper.com/speed_limit_enforced_by_radar.bmp

Schreck
November 19th, 2004, 04:25 PM
I'll have to buy a Stealth bike to ride in that county....That's to funny! ;)