I think they'd have been a lot better off contracting with any other company in the world than the one they contracted it with.

It would really be nice if a bunch of people would go out to the intersections where the cameras are located and hold signs up to warn the drivers of the presence of the cameras.

Or maybe just watch the traffic, take down the license plate numbers of any car it takes a picture of when it looks like any kind of possible malfunction or error in the machine, and contact the owner of the car and offer to testify in court about the malfunction.

State law requires the intersections equipped with cameras to have signage warning drivers of the photo enforcement.

I think Lubbock has some of those signs that we are no longer using, maybe Amarillo can borrow ours.

Say what you will about the cameras, but the technology that is used there is incredible. I was able to see some of the stuff the city got on violators, and the quality of the photos, and the fact that each violation is also videotaped in real time is impressive. I know Lubbock was actually able to go back and look at accidents that occurred at some of those intersections to determine who ran the red light, etc. Carl Isett has made that a no no now, though.

Personally, I didnt have a problem with the cameras. I don't run red lights, so I looked at it like a tobacco tax. I ain't gonna pay it, so who cares. Where the City of Lubbock when bad is they tried to sell it as a safety issue, when in fact it was all about the money.

It's not the red light cameras I hate. It's the company contracted to do it and the owners of that company.

For what it's worth, I used to be head of R&D and MIS for the first American photo radar company and one of the larger stockholders of the company. The company contracted to do it was a franchisee of ours. If it weren't for them, our company would still be in existence and going strong and my stock would likely be worth millions by now.

hate those things