Wanted - Loover / license plate cover

[Mile High Trout]

We do not manufacture covers with "slats" or "louvers", nor do we have access to these covers.
All the covers we manufacture are on our website at zzzzm
Thank you.

Regards,

 

[Mile High Trout]

That settles it. Another rejection letter.

I'm driving back and forth through a mud puddle tonight.

Like seriously hitting it like a 4x4 event.

 

[berniek]

<mod edit>

Please do not post copyrighted material here, it is against our rules. Copy from newspapers, magazines, other websites, are all copyrighted unless it is from a government entity.

</mod edit>

 

[Mile High Trout]

So if there is no camera, it's cool to run red lights. Check.

Bernie, it was my understanding this recent legislative deal was only focused on flasher cameras and auto ticket deals. And that guy who put together that nice fluff article, must have missed the top google hit, which is the aclu disclosure on the actual saleability of the data.

Did you read the link I had posted earlier, with the 30 page slide show deal? Quick review, and worth the read for the information.

The proliferation of cameras is to sell public citizen data like driving habit, to private business. Yes, that happens. Yes it's happening right now. Yes, they don't disclose that with all of this safety related cover up junk. It's a money maker, plain and simple.

In the course of a few weeks dealing with this, I've ran into all sorts of other opinions and views.

Apparently a lot of the guys just take the license plates off of their car, and keep them in the back, unless they are pulled over or something.

I don't give a flying terd what type of camera it is. I'm a free citizen, and I did not give anyone permission to record me, my car, my driving habits, or anything else. The cameras that cut tickets always flash, these are not the same types of cameras. I brake yellow at those intersections anyways. Always with a shorter yellow light to boost private company profits who install those flasher cams.

I'm going to start a new online business. Big old yard signs and window decals that run side to side. "Stop spying on me bro".

Imagine some of the freedom of information requests about drone spying and such, to reveal that every yard in the area had a big, stop spying on me please sign, laid out on their roof or in the back yard. Same deal for autos. Stop spying on the citizenry. A camera is not going to do a darn thing to stop some idiot driver, not one single thing. Who cares if it's recorded or not. It's not worth it on the balance, to record everything, just in case someone does something wrong. That's guilty until proven innocent mentality. I will never ever ever be cool with these cameras. They've got to go.

Found a pic. it's from somewhere else, but looks like the same thing.

http://www.ramtha.com/Docs/Yelm_traffic_camera.jpg

What religion do I have to adopt, to claim religious rejection to cameras?

I cut through corners and plazas now, in attempt to avoid as many as possible. If I turn early, I cut through the plazas instead. If anyone is going to make money on my driving habits, I will be the one to sell my own data to them.

 

[Mile High Trout]

You know what this really is right?

It's the roll out program to get us ready for the black box mandatory install.

If you're cool with cameras, you're cool with the black box in your car, being taxed by the mile.

And you're cool with paying insurance based on the data contained in the black box, which you'll have to share with the insurer to get insured.

And you're cool with getting tickets later, based on history contained in black box. On this day at this time, you went 2 miles over the speed limit. Infraction!

So think about the big picture, and things already in the works in various states, before rolling over and playing dead for these cameras, installed and promoted many times by private businesses.

It's only a matter of time before all insurance companies nationally are subscribing to these databases and auto assimilated driving pattern trackers. Rolled a california stop? That's a higher premium buddy, and we've got the whole thing recorded.

Any private party can subscribe to the database these cameras assimilate, according to the aclu report. There is no requirement or special need or type of use that creates permissibility to subscribe. Anyone can subscribe for a fee. The software behind them is a lot more disturbing the the camera itself. As if the camera was not already disturbing enough.

http://static.infowars.com/2011/02/i/article-images/instruction.jpg

 

[Mile High Trout]

Anyways, nobody had a Loover for me.

But came up with other cool ideas as well.

May the camera be with you, to always record you, and keep you safe, no matter where you go.

 

[Mile High Trout]

http://camerafraud.wordpress.com/

http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/44/4403.asp
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Colorado Municipal League and mayors from towns that would lose photo radar revenue if the bill passed worked hard to strong-arm lawmakers into stopping the bill's advance through the legislative process. American Traffic Solutions hired mega-lobbyist Larry G. Hudson Jr, who pulls in nearly $480,000 per year from clients, to lobby against the ban. State Farm Insurance agitated against the bill because insurance companies profit from the use of photo enforcement in Arizona and California where license points translate into increased premiums paid to the company.

[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif][FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"There is no compelling evidence that red light cameras or photo radar vans improve public safety, but there are plenty of figures showing they generate millions of dollars in revenue to grow government at the expense of citizens," Gardner said in a statement. "It's disappointing the governor chose to protect the cities' revenue streams over the objection of a majority of Coloradans."[/FONT]

http://thecoloradoobserver.com/2014/04/bill-to-ban-red-light-cameras-gets-green-light/
[/FONT]Critics called it a “Robocop” system that increases revenue but not safety, deprives citizens of their constitutional right to due process, and violates the principle of innocence until proven guilty.

http://photoradarscam.com/trust.php
That one is rich. Lots of news leads. Bribery? Oh boy! The rabbit hole goes deeper than I initially thought.

 

[berniek]

I did read the 32 slide presentation. It is obvious that technology is ahead of the law and judicial guidelines need to be established.
I was trying to point out above, that not all cameras are created equal and serve different purposes and have different functions.
My insurance company asked if I would allow the installation of a monitoring device on my car that might reduce my rates. My response was obvious.

Cameras can be a life saver and speed up the apprehension of criminals, like seen at the Boston marathon bombing or the London subway bombing.

The purpose and use of the video data must pass a thorough judicial review and examination to protect individuals privacy rights.

 

[Mike Garrett RAA]

Big brother is watching you! I am all in favor of traffic camera and would like to see everyone who runs a signal getting a ticket. Old joke..."how do you tell if the driver is from Colorado?". He is the third car through the red light!. Terrible problem here and the leading cause of accidents.

 

[Mile High Trout]

If you want to sacrifice your personal liberties, be my guest.

Please don't give away mine.