 Custom Search  How Many Photo Tickets Will It Take Before You Fight Back? GPS Radar Detectors Pay For Themselves. Winnipeg: Police Chief Promotes Revenue Over Public SafetyTHE chief of police says he wants more photo radar used on the streets, not less, even after a recent court case that's jeopardized the practice of handing out tickets in dormant construction zones.Winnipeg Police Service Chief Keith McCaskill said Monday, photo radar improves public safety and discourages drivers from speeding. McCaskill said he'd like to see use of the cameras expand. The controversial cameras have been under renewed debate after a University of Manitoba law student got nine photo radar tickets nixed this January, arguing successfully the tickets were invalid. However, McCaskill said the cameras can be a useful tool to save police time.
"We've got so many demands on the police service, so it's very difficult for us to take somebody off a criminal investigation, or even uniformed officers, and put them down there to do radar enforcement." McCaskill said he wanted to see a "balanced" approach to use of the cameras. "It wouldn't matter to me if we have to notify the public where they are; it's about getting people to slow down," he said. McCaskill said there should be no photo radar at construction sites where no workers are present, unless there are restrictions to the roadway that would make it unsafe. Those restrictions could include narrowed lanes or soft shoulders. The issue will come before the province's Court of Appeal this April. McCaskill's remarks emphasized promoting public safety, and not the revenue that the city collects on the tickets. "I would be supportive if we could expand photo radar and even notify the public, 'Guess what? The photo radar van is right there.' I don't have a problem with that, because the whole idea is to stop people from speeding and that's what we should be focusing on," he said. He later added: "We'll never be in a position to have police officers on every corner." Photo Enforcement Survey Thomas has collected a petition with about 1,200 names opposing photo radar use. "I would ask, based on the safety data, why would you be promoting this?" she said. Source Winnipeg Free Press, Gabrielle Giroday The Guru's View's Wow! Shall I get the shovel out for this one or do we need heavy equipment? First of all, 'Manpower and Resource Shortages' is the same tired Song and Dance Every Police Chief performs. How on earth did we manage before photo radar to have a full complement of dedicated traffic officers? Who by the way were getting great results. Ok, I'm not going to go on a rant here, I am simply going to do something the Chief isn't doing. Backing my opinions with facts! I'm sure that most of you can already see through what the Chief is saying, however for those who don't, read on as I pick apart the statements quick and then end with my Top Ten things the City should reveal about Photo Enforcement to the public. The Chief says that photo radar improves public safety and discourages drivers from speeding. The City has yet to provide any Solid Data on how the program has done this. They are required every year to present a report to the Province on the state of photo enforcement and it's statistics. Why are these reports not presented to the Public if the evidence is so overwhelmingly positive to Public Safety? "It's a useful tool that helps Police Save Time." Ok....and how does that work? I never realized that saving time was the objective. Throughout my career it was always pointed out that we didn't ticket to generate revenue, we did traffic enforcement to deal with problem areas, target bad drivers, identify and arrest impaired drivers, suspended and unlicensed drivers and get uninsured vehicles off the street. So I guess the only thing photo enforcement helps to save time with is it just bypasses all that police work stuff and just moves onto collecting the fine. "If done right, it can benefit policing," Yes they have proved that it benefits financially, after all since they started to enforce construction zones, which were never unsafe, they have increased slumping ticket numbers. 2008 saw their best year since the very first year of the program. Also in the next couple of weeks I will give you some examples of where the radar units are stationed during the day and you tell me if it benefits policing or revenue. "We've got so many demands on the police service, so it's very difficult for us to take somebody off a criminal investigation, or even uniformed officers, and put them down there to do radar enforcement." Personally I think this has to be the biggest insult to anybody that has ever done traffic enforcement and the current members of traffic division. Put them down there to do radar enforcement? As if to say that traffic enforcement was a level below the dignity of an average policeman! The Chief fails to remember numerous arrests and amounts of property recovered by traffic officers. Not to mention impaired drivers, after all they are still a safety hazard aren't they?
They don't even broadcast high vehicle speeds to real police officers who may be close by. They have even been caught and photographed sleeping! Well I guess those who are in Central Traffic know your value. Hey....perhaps they could use commissionaires to help with impaired driving Projects. The Chief is fine with people knowing where the units are and welcomes announcing it. This however contradicts what the unit Commander of Central Traffic says. In fact S/Sgt. Hodgson wants to lobby the government to allow them to move their deployments anywhere they want because people are recognizing the vehicles and know the set up zones. Motorists look for them way ahead and slow down as they pass, then speed up again. McCaskill said there should be no photo radar at construction sites where no workers are present, unless there are restrictions to the roadway that would make it unsafe. Those restrictions could include narrowed lanes or soft shoulders. So I guess you can see how the law is going to be changed to read this. It's as if it's already been discussed. "The whole idea is to stop people from speeding and that's what we should be focusing on" "We'll never be in a position to have police officers on every corner." Here's the Scoop! It isn't working, so why continue with it? If it is working then Show people real statistics that prove it is! Never mind the Vagueness, people want real numbers. I don't recall anyone expecting a Police Officer on every corner. No more then they expect a police officer in every school, bar, shopping mall and home. It's a ridiculous statement to make. If some simple changes were made then the great thing is, you wouldn't need one on every corner.
He's Head of Sales for The Camera Company in Canada.
The top ten things people should have revealed to them regarding Winnipeg's Photo Enforcement Program.
The Fact is, it can really be possible to create safe streets without punishing people who are driving a little above a low threshold, or accelerating to clear an intersection because of minimum or short amber times. You can also do it without having to have a Police Officer at Every Corner. Which would be great because then You wouldn't have to lower any one to having to go down there to do Radar Enforcement! I guess I didn't realize that since I left in 2007 that so many officers now are tied up on Criminal Investigations. I'm amazed that murders and crimes were able to be solved when there was a full traffic division and no photo enforcement. Slow Down, Drive Safe and Keep Your Money In Your Pocket! Larry Stefanuik
|
