- November 19, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
Quick yellow lights discriminate against seniors
Dear Editor:
I am rather dismayed by the hate speech directed against the person who expressed the hardship he experienced as the result of receiving red light tickets. Seniors on a fixed income are all too often forced into deciding whether to spend their money on food or medicine. To label that person as a “whiner” is uncharitable to say the least.
No one is arguing whether to obey the law or not. The question is whether the red light cameras are effective or not in reducing accidents. Several major studies have concluded that red light cameras increase accident rates, specifically rear-end accidents — they don't reduce them.
Recently, I witnessed a bad accident at the intersection of Belle Terre and Palm Coast parkways. The victims were sprawled on the sidewalk with emergency services attending to them. It was a rear-end accident.
Also, one recent study concluded that increasing the yellow light timing by one second decreased violations by 90%. Yet the timing of yellow lights in Palm Coast is set to the minimum standard allowable by law.
In my opinion, this policy is discriminatory against seniors with slower reaction times. Red light cameras don't do a thing to reduce accidents, and Palm Coast officials haven't produced a scrap of unbiased, creditable evidence to prove otherwise.
Also, in the same Observer issue that contained the three letters condemning the person as a “whiner,” there was a story about a girl who was hit on her bicycle while obediently following the traffic signals. The fault was not hers but the inadequate engineering of the signals.
I think Palm Coast officials need to do a better job than simply blaming the problem on drivers. Perhaps a good start would be to go back to relying on real cops instead of robocops to enforce the law.
Bill Campion
Palm Coast
Editor's Note: According to Cindi Brownfield, communications and marketing manager for Palm Coast, the city has always either met or exceeded the state’s standard for yellow lights.
Attorneys should unite and crush red light cameras ‘pro bono’
Dear Editor:
I was distressed to read the letter by Mr. Donald B. Acker concerning his experience while driving in Palm Coast. If this had been an isolated experience, one might be tempted to overlook the matter. However, an elderly lady friend of ours has had a similar experience. Of my own personal knowledge, I know her to be a very careful, law-abiding and prudent driver.
A few weeks ago, she was driving herself to the hospital for treatment. At the T intersection at State Road 100, the traffic light turned red — there is, of course, no through north-south traffic. The single vehicle to her immediate front came to a full stop, and so did she. The auto turned right, and then she advanced and briefly braked to a stop before turning right.
She received a ticket in the mail, although, like Mr. Acker, she had not committed a moving traffic offense. When she made an inquiry, she was informed that if she took the matter to court and lost, the fine would be three times, or about $450! She paid the fine.
As an attorney and former judge of the city of Flagler Beach (this was 45 years ago, before the present judicial arrangement), I was outraged. Not only is the “fine” of $158 excessive and punitive, but to threaten law-abiding citizens with a triple fine is nothing short of a criminal extortion. I find it beyond belief that any competent city attorney would draw up such an ordinance which chills the right to due process of law and, worse, that any competent city official would vote for it.
The police powers should never be use to extort “revenue” from the public.
I intend to inform AAA of the traps in Palm Coast, and, as a charter member of the Flagler County Bar Association and past two-term president, I urge the membership to crush this tyranny pro bono. Remember, freedom is not free; all that is necessary is for a few good men (persons) to do nothing.
William Farris McGee
Flagler Beach
Sounds like a serial red-light runner to me …
Dear Editor:
In a recent letter to the Palm Coast Observer, the writer complained about receiving his second red light camera fine and its negative effect on his Social Security payment. Apparently, this is a serial red light abuser who didn't learn his lesson after the first citation. Who knows how many times he has run red lights and how many lives he has put at risk? My guess is that he has been routinely running lights for years and only now is being caught on camera.
Then, in a rather childish tantrum, he threatens the city with economic boycott, and other drivers with inconsiderate driving.
I hope he and other red light camera “victims” actually do leave Palm Coast, or at least do their driving and shopping elsewhere. Then, perhaps, the rest of us can drive safely through intersections.
Keep those red light cameras rolling!
Mike Cocchiola
Palm Coast
Red light cameras violate rights of the citizens
Dear Editor:
If they want enforcement on problem intersections in this little town called Palm Coast, deputies should handle the job. They are capable and compassionate human beings.
The fact is that if you get one of these citations, as they so eloquently call them, you usually get it at least a month after the offense. You cannot face your accuser (a camera), a violation of my Fourth Amendment rights — there is no explaining to a deputy what caused the issue. And if you know you weren't driving, you have to name who was, a violation of my Fifth Amendment right to remain silent.
This town of ours is just another example of government gone wild. I will never vote for any candidate who supports this policy.
Robert St. Clair
Palm Coast
