Robert McNees in last week’s letter to the editor is grossly misinformed. I am not now nor have I ever been a lawyer. I am a professional merchant seaman, ex-Naval officer and anti-red light camera activist.
McNees is also way off the mark in his support of RLCs as a safety measure. He has unwittingly succumbed to the big lie technique of political propaganda which is: Many people will come to believe a lie must be true if it is big enough and is loudly repeated often enough. The lie here is that red light cameras reduce accidents.
No such reduction has taken place in Sugar Land and the silence of the city in this regard is very telling. All the studies proclaiming the safety benefits of red light cameras have been thoroughly discredited by numerous impartial researchers. An excellent source of these is here: www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/studies
I have never gotten a red light camera ticket nor am I opposed to strict enforcement of the red light law, but Sugar Land’s program is unfair to the driving public. And, because the promised reduction in accidents has not occurred it needs to be shut down.
It also must be pointed out that the claim made by the city’s spokesman that a collection agency is used by the city to go after unpaid RLC fines is false. It is a blatant attempt to cover-up the fact that RLC fines are virtually voluntary. There are three reasons a vehicle owner might feel justified in refusing to pay the fine. These are explained here: www.houstoncoalition.net/three_reasons
Ray Patel, in his letter in the same edition, requested that the city ban red light cameras. While hoping for his success, I will continue my petition drive. Volunteers are needed.
H. F. Van Der Grinten