Comments for Judge: traffic cameras constitutional at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 6 out of 6 comments http://www.theind.com Thu, 23 May 2013 14:49:34 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://www.theind.com/home/4783#comment-2228 "The problem I have is that some out-of-state company is reaping half the profits. " Excellent point! I can think of at least 2 local companies with the networking and engineering expertise to implement a red light camera system. They weren't even asked. RedFlex and a competing company, both from out of state, were the only 2 vendors considered. Did LCG ever consider rolling their own? And who eventually got the contract? The company with the sales guy that has been involved in state/local politics for over 20 years. LUS fiber was handled similarly. The only "high tech jobs" that has brought to local companies is digging ditch and laying fiber. 2, maybe 3, local companies have the expertise to build that kind of network--the actual core network. They did not. Has anyone seen any job postings for "network engineers", "network managers", "network analyst", "help desk personnel"? This is a consistent pattern of behavior from LCG. - ragin_cajun Mon, 10 Aug 2009 10:31:06 +0100 http://www.theind.com/home/4783#comment-2213 We can agree to disagree, then. NO ONE I know thinks SafeSpeed is good. So I don't know anyone who sees it the way you two see it. And I'd like to know, because I'm really curious. If you like red light cameras, what wouldn't you like? What would the government have to do for you to say "Enough"? Would you support 500 "crime cameras" all over Lafayette? Would you support random drug screening of all welfare recipients? Or high school students? I'm not so interested in your specific view on these proposals. I just want to know what belief/philosophy informs your opinions. Is it a matter of extent? Is there a point beyond which you think the state cannot intrude into the life of the individual? Or is the good of the community embodied in the state, so the state can do whatever the community at large thinks is OK, so long as it's good for the whole of society? - ragin_cajun Fri, 07 Aug 2009 08:08:01 +0100 http://www.theind.com/home/4783#comment-2212 I don't have a problem with the red light cameras. The problem I have is that some out-of-state company is reaping half the profits. If this were wholly administered by LCG and the monies kept here, I'd be in full support. Why don't these people go after that instead of trying to take down the whole system? And aren't the speed vans supposed to be used for neighborhoods? That's what Trammel said. Then why do we see them on busy roadways like Ambassador Caffery? Put them in the neighborhoods! That's where we need them. - JP Fri, 07 Aug 2009 07:41:24 +0100 http://www.theind.com/home/4783#comment-2204 I love the red light cameras! They are a blessing. Every time I see the camera take a photo of a violator, I feel safer. Lafayette has become so dangerous to drive and I see violators every day. If there is an intersection without a camera, you can book it, one or two cars will go through the red light. I've heard some cameras were disconnected on the Northside of Lafayette and I avoid those intersections because I know of people who brag about speeding through them. - Myrick6 Thu, 06 Aug 2009 17:07:34 +0100 http://www.theind.com/home/4783#comment-2198 I'm in full support of speed van's...I hope we get more ! - PlumpyBoy Thu, 06 Aug 2009 13:59:39 +0100 http://www.theind.com/home/4783#comment-2196 So the only option left to us is to vote out our city councilmen if they don't support banning these cameras in Lafayette. The voters in Sulphur got a referendum on the ballot so that the citizens could vote on it directly, but I think that'll happen in Lafayette. Call your councilman, find out where he stands on this issue, and vote accordingly in 2-3 years. - ragin_cajun Thu, 06 Aug 2009 12:44:26 +0100