[DeTomaso] A brilliant idea from the National Motorist's Ass'n

Boyd Casey boyd411 at gmail.com
Tue Aug 20 20:32:44 EDT 2013


I have gotten one red light camera ticket mailed to me and I have never in
my adult life gotten a red light ticket or knowingly run a red light ( or
stop sign) . I see such actions as gambling with your life ( and the
innocent people who may be coming the other way and don't even know their
"playing". My opposition to red light cameras is not based on a desire to
run red lights but rather on their implementation as revenue generating
devices which have been shown to be inaccurate and  as Terry mentioned in a
previous post may actually contribute to accidents.
Boyd

On Tuesday, August 20, 2013, Himes, Terry (397C) wrote:

>   The problem is not so much "red light camera's" although I am against
> them as they are put up purely
> for generating revenue and NOT for safety.   As proof of this, townships
> and cites have been found shortening
> the "yellow light" duration to increase "red light camera" revenue.  As a
> result rear-end collisions at those
> intersections have increased.   Which is why they have been shut down in a
> lot of CA cites.
>
>  Terry
>
>
>    *Terry W. Himes*
>
> *JPL** Jet Propulsion Laboratory*
>
> *Deep Impact/Epoxi Sequence Team Lead*
>
> *Deep Impact/Epoxi Spacecraft Engineer*
>
> Phone: (818) 393-6261****
>
> Cell:     (818) 653-8213****
>
> Fax:     (818) 393-3147****
>
> *thimes at jpl.nasa.gov <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'thimes at jpl.nasa.gov');>*
>
>
>
>   From: Boyd Casey <boyd411 at gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'boyd411 at gmail.com');>>
> Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 19:13:10 -0400
> To: LS <lashdeep at yahoo.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'lashdeep at yahoo.com');>>
> Cc: "MikeLDrew at aol.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'MikeLDrew at aol.com');>"
> <MikeLDrew at aol.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'MikeLDrew at aol.com');>>, "
> norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org');>" <norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org');>>,
> "detomaso at poca.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'detomaso at poca.com');>" <
> detomaso at poca.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'detomaso at poca.com');>>
> Subject: Re: [DeTomaso] A brilliant idea from the National Motorist's
> Ass'n
>
>   A radar detector is fine but it does nothing to protect one from the
> dreaded "red light cameras" which I believe ( although I have no evidence
> to support this  belief) are more of a problem as far as automated camera
> generated tickets go.
> Boyd
>
P.S.  I think the Pantera research Institute should implement a study to
determine if the device described is effective at blocking plates from red
light cameras. I have read that the commercially advertised products that
promise to do the same are useless. I don't need to read a scientific paper
to know that nothing that comes in a spray can is going to work ( unless
it's an opaque spray paint)! LOL

>
>  On Tuesday, August 20, 2013, LS wrote:
>
>  I like this thread and the idea contained.
>
>  I'm just wondering though...why not buy a good radar detector? It will
> protect from speed cameras as well as any other type of speed related
> monitoring.
>
>  Despite the quote about the Maryland law, the state is quite lenient with
> regards to cars in general but especially vintage cars. Almost like the
> wild west where you can title and register just about anything and the
> police are generally very relaxed with regards to enforcement. It is a good
> state to be a car enthusiast.
>
>  LS
>
>
>
>
>
>  *central *
> *wines-spirits   est 1934
> *
> *
> *
> *625 e street nw
> *
> *washington, dc 20004*
> *
> *
> *centralwines.com
> *
> *
> *
> *facebook.com/CentralLiquors
> *
> *
> *
> *202-737-2800*
>
>
>
>     ------------------------------
>   *From:* Boyd Casey <boyd411 at gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'boyd411 at gmail.com');> <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'boyd411 at gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> '\x26#39;boyd411 at gmail.com');>');>>
> *To:* Will Kooiman <will.kooiman at gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'will.kooiman at gmail.com');> <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'will.kooiman at gmail.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> '\x26#39;will.kooiman at gmail.com');>');>>
> *Cc:* "MikeLDrew at aol.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'MikeLDrew at aol.com');><javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'MikeLDrew at aol.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> '\x26#39;MikeLDrew at aol.com');>');>"
> <MikeLDrew at aol.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'MikeLDrew at aol.com');><javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'MikeLDrew at aol.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> '\x26#39;MikeLDrew at aol.com');>');>>; "
> detomaso at poca.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'detomaso at poca.com');><javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'detomaso at poca.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> '\x26#39;detomaso at poca.com');>');>" <
> detomaso at poca.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'detomaso at poca.com');><javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'detomaso at poca.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> '\x26#39;detomaso at poca.com');>');>>; "
> norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org');> <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> '\x26#39;norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org');>');>" <norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org');><javascript:_e({},
> 'cvml', 'norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> '\x26#39;norcal-saac at norcal-saac.org');>');>>
>
>  *Sent:* Tuesday, August 20, 2013 5:32 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [DeTomaso] A brilliant idea from the National Motorist's
> Ass'n
>
>  They question you have to ask yourself is 1. Are you willing to break the
> law to fight something that you think is blatantly unfair ( red light
> tickets ticket the owner who is not neccesarily the driver ) when the car
> he owns triggers a red light camera violation. Ther have been several
> Legislators who have challenged these laws and have provided some proof
> that they are not accurate .
> 2. What is worse ( ie. a more serious violation a.having a cover on your
> license plate or b. getting a red light camera ticket ?) Currently as far
> as I know a red light camera ticket is not a moving violation because they
> can't prove who is driving the car. If a device that makes a license plate
> unreadable is a moving violation or a criminal offence then it may not be
> worth the risk. For those of you who answered ( hopefully to themselves)
> that they are not willing to break the law , remember that next time you
> have the Pantera out and the speedo  needle is nudging past the 75 mph
> mark!
> Another point woth investigating , the author implied that it was neccesary
> to view the license plate from an extreme obtuse angle ( on top of a camera
> pole). So under normal circumstances the obscuring effect should not be
> noticeable at all from the normal position a law officer might be viewing
> ones license plate from.
> From mu expierience and understanding of the law it is illegal to have any
> kind of cover on a license plate. I would be interested in experimenting
> with the glass used in some upscale restaurant's bathroom doors that are
> translucent and with the flip of a switch the glass becomes opaque!That's
> real James Bond stuff!
> Boyd
>
>  P.S.
> Will , does that mean it's illegal to put a license plate on your car in
> Missisippi? " If a human can't read it it's illegal" ( Missisippi has one
> of the highest illiteracy rates in the country) LOL
>
>  On Tuesday, August 20, 2013, Will Kooiman wrote:
>
>  > If a human can read it, a camera can too.
> >
> > If a human can't read it, it's illegal.
> >
> > If it is obstructed such that it can only be read from certain angles, it
> > is still obstructed and illegal.
> > --
> > Will
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 8/20/13 2:04 PM, "MikeLDrew at aol.com" <MikeLDrew at aol.com> wrote:
> >
> > >Hi guys,
> > >
> > >Copied and pasted from the NMA's newsletter....
> > >
> > >Mike
> > >
> > >====
> > >
> > >The Internet is full of websites that sell covers and sprays claiming to
> > >obscure your license plates from those pesky ticket cameras. We¹ve been
> > >reluctant to endorse such products since they reportedly don¹t work very
> > >well, and
> > >they may result in drivers running afoul of the law. (More on that
> below.)
> > >
> > >But, when we got the following letter from a lifetime NMA member in
> South
> > >Carolina (we¹ll call him Al) describing his DIY license plate privacy
> > >filter,
> > >we were impressed with his ingenuity and thought other NMA members would
> > >be
> > >interested. Al¹s solution, described below, relies on readily available
> > >privacy filter material used to obscure computer monitors when viewed
> > >from an
> > >angle:
> > >
> > >Reading about 3M computer privacy filter material, I found a merchant
> > >online offering the size for my iMac desktop. I chose that option
> because
> > >it
> > >could be cut into multiple license plate covers. For reference, I
> ordered
> > >the
> > >21.6 inch width. Click here for more information. It comes in gold or
> > >smoke. I
> > >chose smoke and installed the non-reflective side out.
> > >
> > >Other parts required are a frame and clear, plastic cover available at
> > >Advance Auto. As intended for computer screen privacy, the filter goes
> > >opaque as
> > >th
> DeTomaso at poca.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'DeTomaso at poca.com');><javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> 'DeTomaso at poca.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml',
> '\x26#39;DeTomaso at poca.com');>');>
> http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>
>
>
>  _______________________________________________
>
>  Detomaso Forum Managed by POCA
>
>  DeTomaso mailing list
> DeTomaso at poca.com <javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'DeTomaso at poca.com');>
> http://poca.com/mailman/listinfo/detomaso
>
>



More information about the DeTomaso mailing list