Visitors
Speed Cameras Have now been Approved and will be Implemented in IL
Gov. Quinn signs bill to allow speed cameras near schools, parks
SPRINGFIELD — Gov. Pat Quinn on Monday ended months of deliberation and signed into law a measure allowing Chicago to install speed-enforcement cameras near schools and parks.
Mayor Rahm Emanuel had been pushing for the measure for months.
The new speed-enforcement law, which Sun-Times columnist Michael Sneed reported Sunday Quinn would sign, promises to pump a massive infusion of new cash into Emanuel’s city government, ensnaring drivers in a sprawling anti-speeding dragnet that soon will cover any neighborhood with a school or park.
Quinn had until Monday to sign or veto the legislation, or it would have automatically taken effect.
He appeared to have been wary of the potential backlash the new state law might unleash among city voters. Quinn’s office had received an overwhelmingly negative public reaction to the measure, which will take effect July 1. Of 224 phone calls, letters or online communications, more than 91 percent opposed the measure, the governor’s office said.
“Reducing speed around schools and parks where children are present is a good policy for Illinois, and I’ve signed the legislation because I think it does have an impact on safety,” Quinn told reporters.
Quinn also disputed the idea that the bill’s primary purpose was as a revenue generator for the city.
“I thought safety was the No. 1 consideration. I think that’s the only way to go,” he said. “If we can save lives, children’s lives in particular, I think that’s a worthy goal.”
The bill that state lawmakers approved last fall would permit speed-enforcement cameras to be mounted within one-eighth of a mile of city parks and schools and authorize fines of between $50 and $100, depending on how fast the driver was going over the speed limit.
The hours of operation around schools would be on school days only and span from 6 a.m. to 8:30 p.m. Monday through Thursday, but hours would lengthen Friday, to 6 a.m. to 9 p.m. Around parks, the cameras would function between one hour before the park opens to an hour after it closes.
Companion legislation that Quinn signed Monday also established that drivers caught speeding between six and 10 miles an hour in the camera-enforcement zones would face $50 fines and an additional $50, if late.
Fines of $100 would be allowed when drivers are caught going more than 10 miles an hour over the limit.
The tickets wouldn’t be considered a moving violation.
Here is the rest of the article......
=================================================================
I guess the red light cameras were just not enough. Now IL will be implementing these speed cameras. I am sure they will start out sparse, but just like red light cams, I think these will spread like wildfires. I don't know really what to think. I mean, if there really are dangerous areas where many incidents have occurred, I would be supportive of this type of speed camera. However if it is just about generating revenue, then I really think they should just scrap the plan.
One question I have is that if it was just about safety around the schools, then why does this go until 8:30 PM at night rather than a couple hours after the school closes, and after school activities are finished? I understand that people shouldn't be speeding especially through these areas, but is this the best way to deal with it? Maybe, or maybe not....
With regards to the red light cameras, I can understand for giving fines for blowing through stop lights, but not stopping fully for a right hand turn before the line (A rolling stop) if there isn't any traffic coming is ridiculous in my opinion. Rather than making intersections safer in my opinion, they are just generating revenue. I wouldn't have a problem at implementing these red light cameras at trouble intersections, but it seems unnecessary to have them at so many in the same area.
Do any other states have these speed cameras in their state, or is IL the first one to be implementing these cameras. I am thinking these are somewhat unnecessary, but if they can prove it keeps kid safe, then I may have a change of heart. What do you think about this issue, would you be in favor or opposed to having these cameras being put up on your streets? Please feel free to weigh in on the issue. Thanks!
Email
Print Article
Favorites
Report Abuse
User Comments
 |
True Rachel, MN used to have these red light cameras a well, but these were removed due to a number of inaccuracies. Quinn wasn't left a great situation by Blago, but I guess the verdict is still out how he is doing as the Gov. of IL. Rahm hopefully will not pitch this idea to Jan over some finger sandwiches. Thanks for sharing your view. |
 |
|
 |
We have lots of them all over Fort Lauderdale 'for the safety of people'--BS--it is just a way for the city to get more money BUT they have found it ties up the courts, people who fight the tickets usually win and it is costing the city money--now they are wondering if it 'keeps people safer'!!! The law here is that a sign must be put up saying there is a camera ahead! |
 |
yep. they have to warn you or its entrapment. They are a waste of money at best, people get used to the fact they are there and there is no revenue to the city only the camera outfit they lease from. |
|
I hear that Martin...it seems that in many cases safety is not the main concern, but rather how they can squeeze some money out of you. They have signs here as well, but many times it is posted up on the light and not always noticeable. I guess they are hoping that you won't notice until it is too late. Thanks for your feedback. |
 |
A few years ago they put up a few red light cameras in out here in our semi-rural county. Somebody filed a suit immediately. It wouldn't have been so bad, but the yellow lights were much shorter than at other intersections in the county. I nearly put passengers through the windshield a few times, because the light changed so quickly. I learned at those lights to go very slowly if the light was green, so I could stop on a dime if it turned yellow. Anyway, within a year, the challengers won and the lights were removed. I know of a few people that got tickets....and I don't even hardly know anybody. The whole system was rigged to generate money, not to prevent potential accidents. I rather suspect that is also the case in Illionois. Just another way to screw with us and make money. |
|
m-kat I think there were several states that removed them. If the government is hoping for a streaming influx of money.....they need only to babble....peace or safety....and it doesn't take long to get a mob with their pom poms cheering them on....
|
|
My friend Joe (niece's dad) who lives here is a California liberal. He saw on the news they were being removed from our town and mentioned it to me. I said "Good!" He didn't understand my attitude about it. He believed they were a good thing. |
|
They are promoted as good, via safety. That is a hoax. |
|
I agree. As That Dude mentioned, it might be one thing if they are set up at an intersection that has a lot of accidents with injuries...but that certainly wasn't the case with our lights. They were there to generate money. Pure and simple. |
|
Busy intersections are not the cause of accidents. Neither is lack of cameras. So to presume cameras will lessen accidents is a hoax. Engineers can arrange lights at intersections to be an effective measure to move traffic safely through an intersection. If the light sequences fail, perhaps we should reconsider hiring an person of intellict with a degree, and hire a LOCAL smart wise person to solve the obvious LOCAL problem... |
|
the problem we've found in our city is, people get used to the fact they are there, then they dont get to give tickets, hence no revenue. Now, the city leases the service, so it cost the city a bunch, the revenue mostly goes to pay for the cameras. A 250 buck ticket gives about 200 bucks to the camera company.....if no tickets are issued the city still has to pay the "lease" on the cameras, its a waste of money actually. |
|
True, mamakat, in many instances it appears the bottom line is to generate revenue without doing a lot of work. I hate lights that change way too quick. That is probably one of the biggest factors which cause accidents. Thank you for your opinion. |
|
That is a good point Charlie...If people know the intersection, they will be sure not to chance any yellows. I guess the state is hoping for the first timers to hit these lights. Thank you for your input. |
|
We had three of those lights here in our small town. Every one of them, the yellow light was shortened up, so even if you were cruising right at the speed limit, if you were 100' from the intersection when it changed, you were lucky if you could get through it in time. Obvious entrapment. More than once, if my niece's hadn't been wearing seat belts, they would have been thrown into the windshield, I hit the brakes so hard to avoid going through that light. |
 |
We have a few of these stop light cams in Palatine and though I have never been caught by one, I don't like all they eyes watching me! Rahm is all about finding revenue wherever he can...saftey is a shell game, smoke and mirrors for collecting more cash...but then again, I'm a good driver and not worried about it, so whatever... |
|
the camera company makes most the revenue from the tickets from what I understand, our city has people trying to get rid of them because of the cost, it's expencive. |
|
Now I have to worry about looking good behind the wheel in case my photo is snapped! |
|
wear sunglasses, they will never recognise you......you know what the elephants said when they saw Tarzan in sunglasses?? Nothing, they didn't recognise him!!! |
|
Nice work DP, yeah I guess this is an easy way to generate revenue. Speaking of Palatine, that is really different on the main drag where you have to exit right to make a left hand turn. I was pretty surprised by this since I haven't seen too many of roads like this in the US. Thank you for sharing your voice. |
|
That strech of Palatine Road is weird, we live in the main downtown Palatine area and it's much like a normal road there... |
 |
Rahm is entirely about control. In the "Brave New World" he, Obama and the rest of the SACs intend to create you will be told which fork to eat with, how many tines it may have and which hand to put it in. Failure to obey will put you in a concentration or re-education school. When those cameras go in the speed limit will eventually come down to 8 miles an hour "for the safety of the children". |
|
this has nothing to do with Obama, why bring him up? |
|
For a number of reasons. Most obviously the partnership between Rahm, Obama and the tactics they develop and test in Illinois. Secondly because this kind of control and destruction of personal freedom is a primary vehicle for the radical movement. |
|
this stuff is happening everywhere, it has NOTHING to do with Obama, your hate is showing. Jan Brewer was doing it until they finally figured out it was costing way more than they were making, and they will here too. Your prejudice against Obama is so clear when you do stuff like this. Your a better man than that...aren't you? |
|
When you say that I am prejudiced against Obama are you suggesting that I am racially prejudiced against Obama? |
|
I'm saying that for you to involve Obama in everything, even things he has nothing to do with, shows YOUR prejudice for Obama, be it what ever it is. I have no idea why you hate a man you never met. |
|
Keep trying to tell you Charlie I don't hate him. I hate what he's doing. |
|
what he's doing? You mean like having the economy start to come back, job growth getting better? What is it that he's doing you hate so much? I see the conservatives posts here, you all still think he's a foreign born Muslim....you all are mistaken. The funny thing is, he's out there trying to fix things and he's getting nothing but crap that is made up and untrue thrown at him. Like what you said here abour how hes going to tell what fork to eat with....where do you come up with that crap? It's just untrue and baseless. Why can't you admit that you hate him, maybe then you could learn to live with him. Hell, we lived thru 8 years of watching Bush tear this country down, and now we have aguy whpo wants to build it back up and you guys hate him and wont let him do his job. Unbelieveable, then you wont even admit you hate the guy...his policies are working bud, the rights didn't. fact, look at what happened, or is that Obamas fault too? |
|
Not much to say about that Charlie. I'm not going to argue with you. But let me ask you this. Do you think Obama was envloved in the creation of the "Occupy Movement"? Or do you think it's just a coincidence that his class warfare and the Occupy attacks on the wealthy happened to occur at the same time?
|
|
lmao, no he wasn't involved in the creation of the occupy movement, I was though. And because of too many different ideals, at this point I'm out of it, just like the Teaparty, it was a great thing when it started, but to many people with different ideals got involved, I bailed. The purity of both have been compromised at this point. You believe what you want about occupy, i know where and how it all started, there was NO politicians involved, only people pissed off. Class warfare? You mean 1% of the people haveing 90% of the money in this country? Obama didnt start that crap, it was your rich friends like Romney that does that. Why do you equate Obama with Occupy and their hatered for the class warfare the rich have created? he didn't do it, again BUshes tax cuts did more to spur that than anything, plus this whole SCOTUS ruling that corporations are people bullshit. |
|
What can I do? Tell you your reality is not reality? Waste of time. You like yours just the way it is. I will say, though, that the concept that corporations are "people" is nothing new. The legal concept of incorporation was intended to make enterprise an entity in itself so that those operating the enterprise could function without fear of personal legal reprisal. To bicker about whether a corporation is a person or that it is whatever you prefer to call it is simply to engage in word play for the purpose of confusing the real issue. |
|
does it bother you that your skull is full of concrete? |
|
|
Don't feel a thing. |
Hey NBT, I don't know if this has much to do with the Prez, but you make an interesting point worth contemplating. I am not too much believing in the NWO, or BWO as you put it, but it seems like it could be one method for replacing the jobs of ticketing officers especially if these speed cams get put on highways. |
|
Oh yeah, thanks for your opinion. |
|
Any time Dude. |
|
In AZ where my daughter lives, they found it to be unlawful to give you a ticket without being there in person, so all the hiway cameras are gone. The in town red light camers we have in our town pay the camera company way more than the ticket revenue and they charger a lot of money for the ticket, again, I think with the right defence you can beat it, it's entrapment at it's finest....... |
 |
Told my hubby about this and he wondered how long it might be before people find a way to shoot these cams out. We keep having the red light cams put up...taken down...put up...taken down. I've gotten hit once by one and paid the $50 bucks. They even sent me a link to the video taping me going through the light. In NC..most of these things haven't last terribly long before people are wasting the courts time..with the end result being removing them. Big brother is everywhere, huh? |
|
its about revenue, and when the cities start to figure out how much more the camera people are making over what they get, the cities kinda get pissed off. At least the people of the cities do.....it's true though, you can beat them by the fact the law says a ticket must be given in person, I'd check that one out for sure, thats kinda what happened in AZ. No one was paying the tickets and they couldn't do anything about it. Yours was cheap, here it's about 250.00 for the red light......50 for the ticket it self and the rest for administration and camera people. |
|
I know a guy who has a pile of them....just never pays them. So far nothing has happened. But my hubby insisted, pissed as it is about the cams, that I pay the fine. 250....holy shit. |
|
yeah, holy shit is right, lol. I've never got one, lol.........knock on wood.... |
|
I got pissed one morning when I was about to have to sit through the same red light twice. There's something wrong when that happens. I've also heard that at some of the places where there are these cameras that the yellow light is shorter than normal...this either causes people to slam on breaks (so they don't get a ticket but might have someone pile into the back of them) or just run the red light..which is what I did! |
|
you naughty girl, lol |
|
Haha, ILC, that would be intersting to see if people would start shooting out the cameras. You think they would replace these, but do you think they would also put in hidden cams then trying to capture someone shooting these out. Too many cameras maybe...Thanks for sharing. |
Some states have street cameras. Look up Arizonia. They revealed altered lights to entrap motorists, lack of people paying fines, other things. They removed them. Maybe Quinn could get a good deal on some. Perhaps Rham could put in a good word with Jan....lol....
They are a waste of money imo