Roads Being Made Less Safe to Increase Revenue

Yet another report shows that red light cameras increase accidents. That's no surprise. PennDot has raked in over $21 million for their portion of the revenue from the cameras. So, do you think they care if you get in a wreck? Have they taken the cameras down? Nope. Despite this study, they will keep the cameras and make the roads less safe so that they may have more money to spend.

It's all about the money.

King Barry Sounding More Like a Dictator

President Obama (aka King Barry at this site), said "I've told my administration to keep looking every single day for actions we can take without Congress. . . . And we're going to be announcing these executive decisions on a regular basis." He says that, where Congress won't act, he will. One could get the impression that he is setting himself up to be a dictator. After all, we have an emergency. . . . a crisis. Congress is doing nothing, so he must take charge.

If this country is given the opportunity to re-elect this bozo and chooses to do so, we deserve what we get. If the emergency / crisis gets bad enough, he may just decide that elections should be suspended until times improve. Does suggesting that make me an alarmist? Maybe so, but considering that trial balloon has already been floated by one of his cronies in NC (Bev Perdue), don't be surprised to hear more about it if the economic crisis "unexpectedly" worsens.

Why no one in Bluff City stood up to the camera clowns

Well, the Bluff City speed cameras are about to be turned back on, the speed limit will be reduced and the length of the speed trap will be extended. The city "leaders" continue to maintain the incredulous position that the extension of the speed trap is for "traffic calming." In any event, some of my non-local readers might be interested in knowing why no one in Bluff City would bother showing up at the Board of Mayor and Aldermen meeting to complain. It's simple, really.

1. Very few people actually live in the speed trap. It's in a commercial area.


2. Very few people live in Bluff City to begin with and, those that do, benefit greatly from it because nearly 100% of the violaters are from outside of Bluff City. Bluff City has a population of under 1,700 people, but yet they pull in millions from these two speed cameras. You do the math. It allows the citizens of Bluff City to have a much larger government than they otherwise would and they don't have the burden of having to pay for it.


3. The area of the speed trap is essentially strip-annexed into Bluff City. The center of mass of the population of Bluff City is well outside of the speed trap. Depending on the direction of travel, many residents of the area that has been historically known as Bluff City can partially or entirely avoid the speed trap, particularly if they are traveling toward Elizabethton or Bristol.

In other words, why should the citizens of Bluff City care? You're paying for it! It's the new American way - get others to pay for stuff that you want. Whenever one group gets all the benefits and pays little of the costs, what do we expect will happen? It's the same thing that we see happening when over half of the citizens of this country pay no income tax....but that's an issue for another rant.

The Bluff City Rip Off

Not surprisingly, Bluff City is moving to extend their speed trap "north to the Charlie Worlie Bridge." This is probably over two miles from the speed camera. So they have used the camera law as an excuse to extend their speed trap for an additional two miles. For the uninitiated, the Charlie Worlie Bridge is at the bottom of a rather large hill. Look for the police to set up at the bottom of the hill or at the pull-off next to the flea market.

As I predicted, they are using a "traffic study" as justification for this, one that is likely rigged. "[Interim City Manager Judy] Dulaney said a recently completed traffic study of the area showed that most vehicles, northbound and southbound in all lanes of travel, pass through at an average of 66 mph." This is in a 55 mph zone on a 4-lane divided highway in a generally non-congested area. The flea market brings in a fair amount of traffic on the weekend, but commuter traffic is less on Saturday so the net effect is probably de minimus. My guess is that they put their speed trailer on the hill going to the Charlie Worlie Bridge on the northbound side and near the other side of the hill on the southbound side so they would get a higher speed reading.

You people who elect this pathetic group of misfits called the Board of Mayor and Aldermen need to get on the phone and cut this off at the legs. Before this becomes effective, they have to have a second reading that that is scheduled for October 13. Let your voice be heard. You are allowing a government to grow out of control. In no circumstances should so much of any government's revenue be dependent on extracting money from motorists in a speed trap.

Of course, Delaney claims that the speed camera "isn't the primary reason for extending the 45 mph speed limit to the bridge." If you believe that, please contact me about a bridge that I have for sale that is a real money making opportunity. That is such a complete and obvious lie that I cannot believe any bureaucrat is dumb enough to actually say it.