The DFL-controlled House of Representatives is debating – surprise, surprise – a “Red Light Robo-Cop” bill that would contract a private company to get photos of red light violators and refer them to the cops:
Supporters said installing traffic cameras at intersections would improve public safety. Chief author of the bill, DFL Rep. Alice Hausman of St. Paul, said she has found that red light cameras reduce traffic deaths.
I suppose Rep. Hausman’s constituents should be happy she actually showed up rather than subcontracting her job out to one lobbyist or another.
But Rep. Hausman isn’t the only DFLer who yells “off what?” when a lobbyist tells them to jump:
The committee chair, DFL Rep. Ron Erhardt of Edina, said he wanted the committee to vote on the bill but later decided to table it after a lobbyist for a company selling the traffic cameras sent him a note. Erhardt later told reporters that the bill did not have the support of the committee and would likely have been defeated. He said the committee may consider the bill later but only if there is enough support to pass it.
My big question today: “has the DFL actually given office space in the Capitol and State Office Buildings to lobbyists? Perhaps with staff?”
I have a better idea. Let’s require Minnesota motorists to hire a copper to sit in the back seat (a “safety consultant”) when ever their cars are on the road.
Of course the “safety consultant” fee would be calculated at the union rate and would be subject to Gov. JimBeam’s new service tax.
has the DFL actually given office space in the Capitol and State Office Buildings to lobbyists? Perhaps with staff?
The DFL is the staff.
The DFL is the staff.
I think that’s spelled “chaff.”
If it passes, watch yellow lights to be shortened by about a second. They did it in Colorado about 15 years back, with the result that nobody but tourists hits the gas when the light turns green. It would be suicidal, ’cause you literally cannot stop with the yellow light on anything but dry roads.
In 2007, I think, the MN Supreme Court ruled that red-light cameras were unconstitutional because they could not make 100% determination who was driving at the time the offense was recorded.
Choices:
A: The DFL forgot about this.
B: The DFL is too stupid to realize this
C: The DFL doesn’t give a rats ass about SCOMN rulings, YET AGAIN showing that they are violating their oath of office and are only interested in turning “The People’s Republic of MN” into The Democratic Socialist State of MN.
(duh. C obviously.)
Why. In. Gods. Name. is the GOP letting ALL this low hanging fruit pass them by with their hands firmly rammed into their pockets?
The more I see the tyranny and taxation the DFL is hellbent on imposing here, the closer I am to being willing to say “fuckitall”, fleeing my upside down mortgage and doing a Ma-n-Pa Joad roadtrip to somewhere more civilized, like TN.
So didn’t Minneapolis try this boneheaded Big Brother stunt once before only to have lawyers get all of the cases dismissed because there was no proof that the owner was actually driving the car? The definition of insanity is deeply ingrained in the minds of ignorant and short sided DFL dip sticks!
Aren’t semaphore cameras basically a stationary drone?
Discussions of seemingly pointless gun legislation here has caused me to look deeper for “unintended” consequences. Might legislative discussion about red light cameras help those who favor drones get a sense of the public’s sentiment about them without actually using the “D” word?
I got a speeding ticket in Cedar Rapids, Iowa a couple of weeks ago, captured by robo-cop (complete with a photo of my car all alone on the highway in the middle of nowhere. Well, Cedar Rapids.) My first thought when I opened the envelope that came in the mail was that the drones got me.
No votes unless they’re sure it will pass? Is there some sort of penalty if a bill doesn’t pass? Take the two minutes and vote for gosh sake. THAT’S WHAT YOU ARE ALL THERE FOR!
It’s the same mindset that is exhibited by some criminal prosecutors. No prosecutions of crimes unless a positive outcome (conviction) is virtually guaranteed.
More about style than substance – score rather than justice.
(Excluding cases which on their face have been so mishandled by the charging agency as to be procedurally invalid from the start)
Pingback: DFL: “Dependable For Lobbyists” | Shot in the Dark