Intimidation by traffic camera profiteers won’t stop reforms

Reposted from Arizona Daily Independent

A Tucson “newspaper’s” trumped up Ticketgate won’t stop Frank Antenori from reforming traffic camera enforcement.

State Senator Frank Antenori told the Tucson listening audience of the popular Jon Justice radio show last week, that legislators are now backing away from traffic camera enforcement reforms in order to avoid being targets of smear campaigns conducted by reform opponents.

The news of Antenori’s red light ticket made headlines in a local paper, at the same time Antenori was pushing his popular legislation to reform traffic camera practices.

Antenori told Justice’s listening audience that he “screwed up” when he tried to claim legislative immunity for a red light traffic ticket he received in 2009. Antenori called the push for the news story by the profiteers of the traffic cameras, the worst form of intimidation of legislators he had seen.

Antenori said he spoke to a reporter who confirmed that the story’s timing was intentional.

Just this week, the Senate Appropriations Committee voted 8-4 on HB 2557. The law changes the broader definition of intersection to one that says the intersection starts at any painted “stop” line or at the first crosswalk line. This will most likely result in fewer tickets and less revenue for the camera operators.

HB 2557 would bring Arizona into conformance with 38 other states.

The hard hitting, investigative reporters of the Star ignored the tickets of his opponents in their CD8 Ticketgate, and focused solely on the tickets of Antenori. For the record:

Sitton
Sep-04 Tucson Local charge
May-99 Tucson Failure to produce evidence of financial resp, expired registration
Feb-04 Tucson Local charge
Dec-05 Tucson Local charge
Nov-06 Phoenix Local Charge
Oct-07 Tucson Local Charge
Aug-08 Tucson Fail to stop for red light (photo radar)
Feb-09 Tucson Local charge
May-09 Tucson Failure to stop for red light (photo radar)
Jun-09 Tucson Local charge
Jul-09 Eloy More than 65 mph in 55 mph urban area
May-10 Tucson Local charge
May-10 Tucson Local charge
Mar-11 Tucson Local charge

Kelly
Sep-05 Tucson 1) Local Charge, 2) Registration in a county other than residence, 3)Emissions violation
May-10 Marana Speed excess 15mph in a school zone
May-10 Marana Local charge
Jul-10 Marana Local Charge
Dec-10 Tucson Failure to stop for a red light (photo enforcement)

McSally
Aug-99 Santa Cruz County Sued for annulment
Apr-02 Tucson Improper light on license plate, red tail lamps required (fix-it ticket)
Jul-02 Tucson Local Charge

Barber
Sep-03 Tucson Local Charge
Oct-04 Tucson Driving without registration
Aug-10 Tucson Local Charge

Antenori
Jun-06 Tucson Local Charge
Jun-07 Tucson Local Charge
Apr-08 Tucson Local Charge
Feb-12 Scottsdale Local Charge


Comments

  1. “Antenori told Justice’s listening audience that he ‘screwed up’ when he tried to claim legislative immunity for a red light traffic ticket he received in 2009.”

    Actually Frank, you screwed up when you put people’s lives at risk by blatantly running a red light:

    http://youtu.be/Sss-owrorYk

    He might has well have rolled down his window and shouted: “Look at me! I’m a big man! The laws that apply to you don’t apply to me!”

    I hate traffic cameras with a white-hot intensity. I’ve written several poetic polemics against them, including one where I set fire to the Scottsdale photo-radar mini-van. I think it’s BS that there’s basically no way to fight againt them. But there’s a difference between the speeding camera (Arizona, as a prima facie state, should have to prove the speed was unreasonable and provide evidence their camera and speed testing equipment is in working order) and the red light camera.

    Running a red light is *always* dangerous. And what does this:

    “The law changes the broader definition of intersection to one that says the intersection starts at any painted ‘stop’ line or at the first crosswalk line. This will most likely result in fewer tickets and less revenue for the camera operators.”

    Have to do with “Faster Senator, Kill Kill!” Antenori’s decision to endanger the lives of his fellow citizens (as shown in the YouTube clip above)? It escapes me.

    • Tiny Elvis says

      I was really disappointed that there wasn’t a giant pair of rubber testicles hanging from the back of that giant truck

  2. Oberserve says

    Did anyone miss the fact that surveillance video used for “lawful purposes” was released by a private corporation to the media in an attempt to influence a public official.

    THATS RACKETEERING by any definition.

    The source of that video released to the news needs to be tracked down and PROSECUTED for racketeering. So does the CEO of the corporation that released the video as well as the corporate sales team and lobbyist.

Leave a Reply