<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.3" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>Tramel: Camera enforcement makes streets safer</title>
		<description>Comments for Tramel: Camera enforcement makes streets safer at http://www.theind.com , comment 1 to 4 out of 4 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.theind.com</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 13:52:02 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <generator>FeedCreator 1.7.3</generator>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/9798-tramel-camera-enforcement-makes-streets-safer#comment-25808</link>
			<description>S. Bernard needs to use their given name. If S. Bernard does not want to do this, he or she should not be able to post. IF YOU WANT TO POST, NUT UP!! - Michael A. Moss</description>
			<pubDate>Sun, 29 Jan 2012 17:22:34 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/9798-tramel-camera-enforcement-makes-streets-safer#comment-25798</link>
			<description>the clear motivation for the cameras is not safety, it's financial. city government found a way to generate additional revenue.  - Keith Bernard</description>
			<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jan 2012 12:06:54 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/9798-tramel-camera-enforcement-makes-streets-safer#comment-25786</link>
			<description>Pasted:

&quot;And, second, if effectiveness were justification for legal action, then, according to Mr. Trammel's logic, we should all be arrested and put in jail, such action would reduce crime to nothing and as such would be most effective&quot;

If only that could become true.  - Joe LeBlanc</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 22:57:22 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.theind.com/news/indreporter/9798-tramel-camera-enforcement-makes-streets-safer#comment-25784</link>
			<description>What Tony Trammel fails to grasp is the effectiveness of the red light system is not the issue, the legality of using such a system is the issue.  Many citizens would contend such unattended survellance systems are illegal and abusive on the city's part in as much as the accused, in this case the driver, is unable to confront and/or cross examine the accuser, in such cases a machine, in a court and such should be a violation of the Sixth Amendment to the US Constitution. 
Apparently, if one were to follow Tony Trammel's logic, effectiveness is justification enough because accidents have been reduced/speeding has been reduced, yadda/yadda/yadda.  Like statistics will make everything OKedDOKee.  To such apparent ignorance or should I say arrogance, I have but two comments:  first, the biggest liars in the world is statistics and statisticians(sic).  And, second, if effectiveness were justification for legal action, then, according to Mr. Trammel's logic, we should all be arrested and put in jail, such action would reduce crime to nothing and as such would be most effective.  With everyone in jail there would be not speeding/no murders/no rapes/everything would be pure and no problems for &quot;administrators&quot;--and I use such an adjective quite liberally with respect to the Durel administration--such as Tony Trammel.  
Later Dude   - GREGORY  FOREMAN</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 25 Jan 2012 19:36:38 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
