My thought in writing this post is should we reveal a weakness to the enemy? Meaning rights activists vs. politicians/legislators. When the thought occurred to me that based on the poor performance of Florida "bikers" when it came to protecting their rights last legislative session, our weaknesses, e.g. apathy, lack of motivation, lack of caring, lack of balls, are fully recognized by those who would legislate against us.
It is fairly common knowledge among bloggers, newspaper editors and I suspect most politicians that most people are not going to read much more than a two minute sound byte, if that. Which without doing so results in the further "dumbing down" of Americans making it easier for our Rights and Freedoms to be chipped away at.
It also makes it easier to unfairly take your money and time through mandating, via discriminatory legislation, unproven methods to improve your "safety" (ex. MSF curriculum based Rider Training Courses) while ignoring proven methods which, at no cost to you, would dramatically increase your safety, but are "politically" unpopular.
Now it should come as no surprise that the most popular posts on any Biker Related site are going to be about butts, booze and boots. As the least popular posts will be about legislation.
I love butts and boots and deny no man his inclinations. I cherish more my Freedom to enjoy these things without nanny state interference.
To the best of my knowledge Lopez-Cantera is not a "biker". But by utilizing "knowledge" he kicked a heap of Biker ass last session. Question becomes, "How much more of YOUR ass are YOU willing to have kicked?
Here is a link to the post he read. Do what you will.
Helmets, law, ABATE of Floridas President remains delusional
You wanna ride Free? You best be willing to fight!Add to Technorati Favorites
Verified: The comments are in fact from Lopez-Cantera
The other day we posted the following, "Has Lopez-Cantera paid us a visit? Or Not?" Wherein we E-mailed the his office to verify whether or not the comments left attributed to Rep. Lopez- Cantera were in fact left by Rep. Lopez-Cantera or his office.
We contacted his office by phone this date and affirmed that the comments have in fact been left by Rep. Lopez-Cantera. We spoke to a aide in his office and not the representative personally.
Rather than take a chance that the representative may feel that his comments were sufficient to placate the "Biker" community and not call us back, we took the opportunity to offer an alternative option re vertical license plates that his aide said he would communicate to the representative.
Our suggestion:
Rather than lower the fines relating to vertical tags under which the vertical tag would remain an offense resulting in cause to be pulled over and ticketed, would it not be possible to treat vertical tags in the same manner as a "specialty plate" as is done on many other vehicles.Add to Technorati Favorites
For a nominal fee (and here we did mention that the fee should be low enough as not to constitute a penalty in and of itself and that considering the set aside monies for motorcycle issues that have been used by the state for causes other than motorcycling the fee's should be kept low enough as to not be prohibitive) an individual can apply for a specialty vertical tag with the numbers/letters printed vertically so as to be meet the criteria of being readable.
Although I did mention this I can see the state arguing the cost of retooling. But hey, if ya make a mistake the cost of setting it straight should not be an issue.
Further we did note that we had other issues of concern re: 137 and would be happy to discuss them with the representative.
Remember, this bill passed into law because the Florida Biker population sat on their ass. It is rare that you get a second chance. I would suggest it not be wasted.
We contacted his office by phone this date and affirmed that the comments have in fact been left by Rep. Lopez-Cantera. We spoke to a aide in his office and not the representative personally.
Rather than take a chance that the representative may feel that his comments were sufficient to placate the "Biker" community and not call us back, we took the opportunity to offer an alternative option re vertical license plates that his aide said he would communicate to the representative.
Our suggestion:
Rather than lower the fines relating to vertical tags under which the vertical tag would remain an offense resulting in cause to be pulled over and ticketed, would it not be possible to treat vertical tags in the same manner as a "specialty plate" as is done on many other vehicles.Add to Technorati Favorites
For a nominal fee (and here we did mention that the fee should be low enough as not to constitute a penalty in and of itself and that considering the set aside monies for motorcycle issues that have been used by the state for causes other than motorcycling the fee's should be kept low enough as to not be prohibitive) an individual can apply for a specialty vertical tag with the numbers/letters printed vertically so as to be meet the criteria of being readable.
Although I did mention this I can see the state arguing the cost of retooling. But hey, if ya make a mistake the cost of setting it straight should not be an issue.
Further we did note that we had other issues of concern re: 137 and would be happy to discuss them with the representative.
Remember, this bill passed into law because the Florida Biker population sat on their ass. It is rare that you get a second chance. I would suggest it not be wasted.
Who pissed on my bandanna?
Awhile back we posted a pic of a Dead Kitty in the road with a sign next to it saying "Road Hazard."
Well needless to say we pissed off a few "Kitty Lovers" who did not much appreciate a sense of humor developed from watching to many episodes of the weather channel with a 9 volt battery attached to my tongue. I refused to make any apologies because:
A. I am primarily a dog person (although my ol lady might be inclined to leave the "person" off of that statement). Though I have nothing against kitties and regularly feed them to the Raccoons under the house (oh come on now that's a joke, o.k. I feed the Raccoons my ol lady's Luna bars which pisses her off big time).
B. I much appreciate a sick sense of humor. Even if at times that sense of humor can be so sick the only one I can share it with is myself. But hey that's o.k. me and myself get a chuckle.
So anyway, not long ago I was doing yardwork. Yes I know anyone who has ever seen my yard will not believe that, so let me get honest. I was pretending to do yardwork to see if doing so would dull this incessant noise I couldn't silence that began with, "when are you....................?" Some married dudes might be familiar with that noise.
Deciding I could best pretend if not seen, I decide to trim the bushes from the back side. Ya know, between sight and the house. Besides, I thought any potential peeping toms might appreciate it if I cleared em a path.
Well now, my house in St. Marks, was built in 1950 on bricks. St. Marks, Florida is home to every critter known to man and some critters not yet known (well at least if not related). Now what critters do when they are scoping out a neighborhood for a new place to live is look for the place with the least kept up yard. Bingo, my place.
We currently have a gaggle of Raccoons, a flock of Armadillos with their cousin the "rattlers" and God knows what else living under there. We did have a herd of chickens but the Raccoons ate em. Which is sad because they got Roscoe the Rooster whom I had grown quite fond of.
O.K. well anyway, I'm back there with these clippers, actually using them (and yes I did have to read the directions) feeling like jungle boy when all of sudden something latches onto my leg.
You ever been in a pile of bushes in a known critter area and have something unidentifiable latch onto to your leg when you ain't expectin something to latch onto your leg? You ever have your heart go "ka-thump" as you jump so hard you fracture your skull on the window sill and piss down your boot at the same time?
Neither have I. Though I did have a drunk buddy piss on my boot on Fort Lauderdale Beach during spring break one time but that's another story.
However whatever had latched on to my leg had sharp on it cause the sharp was going through my jeans into my leg. So like I knew I should probably look down and see what it was that had latched onto my leg that had sharps on it.
Well low and behold it were a little kitty cat looking up at me trying to go "meow" but hardly getting
"me....." out. So I ask it, "what the hell you doing on my leg?" to which it responds, I kid you not,
"do you have any peanut butter?"
I'm thinkin, o.k. it wouldn't be right to burn it with the brush. And I do have to admit it was kinda cute so I took it in the house and started feeding it Peanut Butter and learned something about cats I didn't know, if you feed em peanut butter they ain't leaving.
So now, a hundred dollar vet bill later (I don't know about anybody else but I never seen a hundred dollar cat before) we got a kitty named "El Gato (sp)" which is spanish for "The Cat." Never mind that it's female and should be called "la gata (sp)" or something only my lady understands cause she speaks fluid spanish which is why I have a difficult time understanding why she insists on calling me "Joseeeeeee!" But then she has stayed in a Holiday Inn............
I do have to admit that me and El Gato have been getting along pretty good. I gots to admire a kitty cat that can put a can of whoop ass on two chihuahua's in heart beat and encourage her every chance I get. And she's right handy when it comes time to get the peanut butter out of my mustache.
UNTIL, UNTILLLLLLLL............. The other morning I got to be some place and as usual am running way late. So I jump in my boots. Then I take my boots off so I could put my jeans on and jump back in my boots while humming "born freeeeeee", grab my bandanna throw it on my head and immediately stop.
"self," I ask, "is my bandanna wet?"
So I reach up and touch it. Yepper, that feels wet. So I take it off and look at it a bit puzzled. Yeah it looks wet. Well how the hell did it get wet? So I sniff it?
Anybody own a cat? If you own a cat I am suspicioning that you understand it doesn't take to many sniffs to identify cat piss. In fact if it were not for the fact that I smoke I might of identified it before I slapped it on my head.
O.K. now I'm pissed. And it's fixing to be on between me and "El Gato". "The Cat" my ass.
So now I'm searchin for "The Cat" and it didn't take me long to find the little bitch. Shes sitting on my pillow looking up at me with some stupid kitty grin on her face and I'm thinkin, "don't you do my damn pillow."
When she says to me (hell I don't know maybe if ya do enough 9 volt batteries you can understand kitty talk, or maybe I never really came down from that last trip, who the hell knows) "you remember that dead kitty picture with the road hazard sign you posted?"
Now I wouldn't have bothered sharing this story were there not a lesson to be learned here.
What goes around truly does come around and Karma is some weird shit. And if reincarnation is true, when I die am I gonna come back as a, ummmmmmmmm "kitty"Add to Technorati Favorites
Well needless to say we pissed off a few "Kitty Lovers" who did not much appreciate a sense of humor developed from watching to many episodes of the weather channel with a 9 volt battery attached to my tongue. I refused to make any apologies because:
A. I am primarily a dog person (although my ol lady might be inclined to leave the "person" off of that statement). Though I have nothing against kitties and regularly feed them to the Raccoons under the house (oh come on now that's a joke, o.k. I feed the Raccoons my ol lady's Luna bars which pisses her off big time).
B. I much appreciate a sick sense of humor. Even if at times that sense of humor can be so sick the only one I can share it with is myself. But hey that's o.k. me and myself get a chuckle.
So anyway, not long ago I was doing yardwork. Yes I know anyone who has ever seen my yard will not believe that, so let me get honest. I was pretending to do yardwork to see if doing so would dull this incessant noise I couldn't silence that began with, "when are you....................?" Some married dudes might be familiar with that noise.
Deciding I could best pretend if not seen, I decide to trim the bushes from the back side. Ya know, between sight and the house. Besides, I thought any potential peeping toms might appreciate it if I cleared em a path.
Well now, my house in St. Marks, was built in 1950 on bricks. St. Marks, Florida is home to every critter known to man and some critters not yet known (well at least if not related). Now what critters do when they are scoping out a neighborhood for a new place to live is look for the place with the least kept up yard. Bingo, my place.
We currently have a gaggle of Raccoons, a flock of Armadillos with their cousin the "rattlers" and God knows what else living under there. We did have a herd of chickens but the Raccoons ate em. Which is sad because they got Roscoe the Rooster whom I had grown quite fond of.
O.K. well anyway, I'm back there with these clippers, actually using them (and yes I did have to read the directions) feeling like jungle boy when all of sudden something latches onto my leg.
You ever been in a pile of bushes in a known critter area and have something unidentifiable latch onto to your leg when you ain't expectin something to latch onto your leg? You ever have your heart go "ka-thump" as you jump so hard you fracture your skull on the window sill and piss down your boot at the same time?
Neither have I. Though I did have a drunk buddy piss on my boot on Fort Lauderdale Beach during spring break one time but that's another story.
However whatever had latched on to my leg had sharp on it cause the sharp was going through my jeans into my leg. So like I knew I should probably look down and see what it was that had latched onto my leg that had sharps on it.
Well low and behold it were a little kitty cat looking up at me trying to go "meow" but hardly getting
"me....." out. So I ask it, "what the hell you doing on my leg?" to which it responds, I kid you not,
"do you have any peanut butter?"
I'm thinkin, o.k. it wouldn't be right to burn it with the brush. And I do have to admit it was kinda cute so I took it in the house and started feeding it Peanut Butter and learned something about cats I didn't know, if you feed em peanut butter they ain't leaving.
So now, a hundred dollar vet bill later (I don't know about anybody else but I never seen a hundred dollar cat before) we got a kitty named "El Gato (sp)" which is spanish for "The Cat." Never mind that it's female and should be called "la gata (sp)" or something only my lady understands cause she speaks fluid spanish which is why I have a difficult time understanding why she insists on calling me "Joseeeeeee!" But then she has stayed in a Holiday Inn............
I do have to admit that me and El Gato have been getting along pretty good. I gots to admire a kitty cat that can put a can of whoop ass on two chihuahua's in heart beat and encourage her every chance I get. And she's right handy when it comes time to get the peanut butter out of my mustache.
UNTIL, UNTILLLLLLLL............. The other morning I got to be some place and as usual am running way late. So I jump in my boots. Then I take my boots off so I could put my jeans on and jump back in my boots while humming "born freeeeeee", grab my bandanna throw it on my head and immediately stop.
"self," I ask, "is my bandanna wet?"
So I reach up and touch it. Yepper, that feels wet. So I take it off and look at it a bit puzzled. Yeah it looks wet. Well how the hell did it get wet? So I sniff it?
Anybody own a cat? If you own a cat I am suspicioning that you understand it doesn't take to many sniffs to identify cat piss. In fact if it were not for the fact that I smoke I might of identified it before I slapped it on my head.
O.K. now I'm pissed. And it's fixing to be on between me and "El Gato". "The Cat" my ass.
So now I'm searchin for "The Cat" and it didn't take me long to find the little bitch. Shes sitting on my pillow looking up at me with some stupid kitty grin on her face and I'm thinkin, "don't you do my damn pillow."
When she says to me (hell I don't know maybe if ya do enough 9 volt batteries you can understand kitty talk, or maybe I never really came down from that last trip, who the hell knows) "you remember that dead kitty picture with the road hazard sign you posted?"
Now I wouldn't have bothered sharing this story were there not a lesson to be learned here.
What goes around truly does come around and Karma is some weird shit. And if reincarnation is true, when I die am I gonna come back as a, ummmmmmmmm "kitty"Add to Technorati Favorites
Bikers at Sioux Falls trial told to remove colors
SIOUX FALLS, S.D. -- The second week of the Sioux Falls trial for two Hells Angels bikers charged with attempted murder drew the first motorcycle club members in the audience.Add to Technorati Favorites
Chad Wilson, of Lynnwood, and John Midmore, of Valparaiso, Ind., are accused of shooting and injuring five Outlaws Motorcycle Club members in August 2006 at Custer State Park.
Defense lawyers say it was self-defense.
About a dozen Hells Angels members from numerous states and Canada sat down in the gallery Monday.
Judge Gene Paul Kean had the jury leave the courtroom and told the bikers to remove vests that display patches with club affiliation, known as colors.
Kean said he made the order because several jurors expressed concern about being intimidated, and it applies to all clubs
O.K. so we all know I'm wacko but the question that popped into this mind was wait a second,
if we are to be judged by a jury of our peers and we are not afraid should we be judged by a jury of those who are? Would not fear of certain aspects of "Biker Culture" color their deliberations and
eventual verdict?
So will the next direction from the judge be, do not stare at the jurors menacingly? Or maybe get plastic surgery a juror is afraid of your face?
When did we start allowing justice to be served by those who are afraid?Add to Technorati Favorites
More on Red Light Cameras. What about the 4th amendment?
11/11/2008
Scholars Uncover Flaws in Red Light Camera Research
American Journal of Public Health confirms errors in the first study used to sell red light cameras in the US.
American Journal of Public HealthUniversity of South Florida researchers have uncovered fundamental flaws in the first US study to claim red light cameras decrease accidents. Since 2001, the insurance industry's report on the benefits of red light camera use in Oxnard, California has been cited by hundreds of cities as the basis for the adoption of photo enforcement (view study in PDF). Researchers Barbara Orban, Etienne Pracht and John T. Large attempted to replicate these findings and discovered that the Oxnard numbers, intended to serve as the model of peer-reviewed scholarship, simply did not add up.
"The regression analysis of [Oxnard study authors Richard] Retting and [Sergey] Kyrychenko does not support their conclusion that red light cameras reduced total or injury crashes," the University of South Florida team wrote in the American Journal of Public Health last month.
In 2004, North Carolina A&T University Professor Mark Burkey was the first to publish a detailed critique of the methodology used in the Oxnard report (read critique in PDF, see page 13). The Florida researchers verified Professor Burkey's findings.
"The Oxnard red light camera study violates many basic principles of sound statistical public health research and lacks internal and external validity," the Florida researchers concluded. "All red light camera investigations should be scrutinized for adherence to applied research methods since studies with greater adherence to quasi-experimental research designs have concluded red light cameras are associated with large increases in crashes and since special interest groups with a financial stake in red light camera use are actively working to influence public opinion and policy."
A number of observers have pointed to conflicts of interest involved in the Oxnard study. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety funded the research which, in turn, helped its parent companies collect millions in additional profit. Because widespread installation of cameras has increased the number of photo tickets issued in California, each of which carries license points, these companies have been able to collect substantially higher annual insurance premiums. In 2001, the former majority leader of the US House of Representatives slammed the Oxnard study's primary author for not disclosing his own fundamental conflict of interest.
"Before joining the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Retting was a top transportation official in New York City at the time the city began looking into becoming the first jurisdiction in the country to install red light cameras," a 2001 report from the Office of the House Majority leader stated (view report). "In other words, the father of the red light camera in America is the same individual offering the 'objective' testimony that they are effective."
As of September 29, Retting was no longer employed by the Insurance Institute. He now works for Sam Schwartz Engineering, a toll road consulting firm.
Article Excerpt:
Analysis Violates Principles of Sound Research & Public Health Evaluation
October 30, 2008
by John T Large, Assistant Professor University of South Florida, Barbara Orban, Etienne Pracht
The study by Retting and Kyrychenko concluding red-light cameras (RLCs) were effective in reducing total and injury crashes [Ref.1], was subsequently reported to be seriously flawed. Burkey and Obeng provide an excellent critique of the deficiencies including the incorrect reporting of results [Ref.2]. Despite this, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), which is funded by automobile insurance companies, funded the Retting and Kyrychenko study and has continued to use the study in their efforts to advance public policy in favor of RLCs [Ref.3-7]; hence, the importance of ascertaining the study's validity.
The regression analysis of Retting and Kyrychenko [Ref.1] does not support their conclusion that RLCs reduced total or injury crashes. We replicated Retting and Kyrychenko's analysis and verified Burkey and Obeng's critique [Ref.2]. Their regression analysis was simply the use of 16 observational units with 12 dummy variables (df = 3). Retting and Kyrychenko1 attempted to measure red-light camera effectiveness by comparing intersections in a single city that installed cameras (Oxnard, California) with three cities that did not. The variable of interest, labeled "camera," included all 125 signalized intersections in Oxnard, of which 11 had a camera in one approach direction and 114 had no cameras installed. The comparison case in the regression analysis was non-signalized intersections in Oxnard. As such, the "camera" finding merely represents the difference in crude accident growth rates between signalized and non-signalized intersections in Oxnard.
Contrary to the reported results, our calculated difference in the crude growth rates (p = 0.061) was not significant at the 0.05 level. Retting and Kyrychenko incorrectly reported a p-value of 0.0281 for the "camera" variable [Ref.1]. The estimated coefficient (-0.07296) for the "camera" variable in our replicated study matches Retting and Kyrychenko's, but the p-values and degrees of freedom differ. Their rebuttal to Burkey and Obeng was that the signalized/non-signalized variable was statistically insignificant in their initial model and dropped from the model, leaving four degrees of freedom to the error [Ref.8]. However, this was not explained in their methods section and is incorrect since this variable was significant in the initial model (p = 0.00051). Further, when excluding the signalized intersection variable, the coefficient for their "camera" variable is still non- significant (p = 0.2131).
The Oxnard RLC study violates many basic principles of sound statistical public health research and lacks internal and external validity. First, the RLC "treated" intersections were not separately analyzed. Second, the purpose of RLCs is to reduce crashes due to red-light running and yet red-light running crashes were not analyzed. Third, the authors admit to deviating from the methods described. Of most concern, the study's reported statistical results cannot be replicated. All RLC investigations should be scrutinized for adherence to applied research methods since studies with greater adherence to quasi-experimental research designs have concluded RLCs are associated with large increases in crashes [Ref.2,9] and since special interest groups with a financial stake in RLC use are actively working to influence public opinion and policy.
Cincinnati joins Steubenville as the second Ohio city to ban photo enforcement by referendum.
The residents of Cincinnati, Ohio made it clear Tuesday that photo enforcement is not welcome in the city. A majority of voters approved an amendment to the city charter prohibiting local officials from ever installing either red light cameras or speed cameras (view text). Referendum co-sponsor Josh Weitzman hopes his coalition's victory inspires other cities.
"We worked long an hard to win," Weitzman told TheNewspaper. "This election is further proof that people do not want to have traffic cameras. Politicians in cities across the country need to take note of this if they plan on getting re-elected."
Cincinnati city council members had been trying for the past four years to install the devices that promised to generate between $2 million and $12 million in annual revenue. Advocates were stopped in 2005 when former Mayor Charlie Luken vetoed a camera ordinance saying, "Let's be honest with the public -- we didn't think about this until we came up with a budget problem."
The push for red light cameras resumed at the end of that year when Mayor Mark Mallory was sworn in. A diverse group of political activists from all ends of the political spectrum banded together to form the "We Demand a Vote" coalition to stop the idea. Members include regional chapters of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Republican Party, the Green Party, the Libertarian Party, and others. The group received more than 10,000 signatures on a petition to put the subject of cameras on the ballot before the devices even had a chance to issue a single ticket. Political leaders quickly backed off their support of cameras after seeing public opinion on the matter.
In 2006, three out of every four voters in Steubenville chose to kick out speed cameras after the devices had issued $600,000 in citations. Over the past twelve years, voters in Anchorage, Alaska; Peoria, Arizona and Batavia, Illinois have also banned cameras.
MORE INFO ON RED LIGHT CAMERAS AND CAMERAS:
Red light Cameras 2 It's not just about running red lights anymore
More on Redlight Cameras 1 and how the state uses law against you
Coming soon to a town near you Red Light Cameras have quotas
Florida can top Californias Red light insanity anyday
UK defends spying in the name of Global warming when it is all ...
More on the invasiveness of Camera monitoring systems=infringing ...
Oh my God it has gotten worse than air fresheners-Florida on the ...
Fourth Amendment - Search and Seizure
MORE ON THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
Could this dude see the future or what? Over time the greatest minds that have ever lived have discussed, debated and argued Freedom and Liberty. It's greatest enemy is fear. And most often fear generated by ignorance.rcAdd to Technorati Favorites
Scholars Uncover Flaws in Red Light Camera Research
American Journal of Public Health confirms errors in the first study used to sell red light cameras in the US.
American Journal of Public HealthUniversity of South Florida researchers have uncovered fundamental flaws in the first US study to claim red light cameras decrease accidents. Since 2001, the insurance industry's report on the benefits of red light camera use in Oxnard, California has been cited by hundreds of cities as the basis for the adoption of photo enforcement (view study in PDF). Researchers Barbara Orban, Etienne Pracht and John T. Large attempted to replicate these findings and discovered that the Oxnard numbers, intended to serve as the model of peer-reviewed scholarship, simply did not add up.
"The regression analysis of [Oxnard study authors Richard] Retting and [Sergey] Kyrychenko does not support their conclusion that red light cameras reduced total or injury crashes," the University of South Florida team wrote in the American Journal of Public Health last month.
In 2004, North Carolina A&T University Professor Mark Burkey was the first to publish a detailed critique of the methodology used in the Oxnard report (read critique in PDF, see page 13). The Florida researchers verified Professor Burkey's findings.
"The Oxnard red light camera study violates many basic principles of sound statistical public health research and lacks internal and external validity," the Florida researchers concluded. "All red light camera investigations should be scrutinized for adherence to applied research methods since studies with greater adherence to quasi-experimental research designs have concluded red light cameras are associated with large increases in crashes and since special interest groups with a financial stake in red light camera use are actively working to influence public opinion and policy."
A number of observers have pointed to conflicts of interest involved in the Oxnard study. The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety funded the research which, in turn, helped its parent companies collect millions in additional profit. Because widespread installation of cameras has increased the number of photo tickets issued in California, each of which carries license points, these companies have been able to collect substantially higher annual insurance premiums. In 2001, the former majority leader of the US House of Representatives slammed the Oxnard study's primary author for not disclosing his own fundamental conflict of interest.
"Before joining the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, Retting was a top transportation official in New York City at the time the city began looking into becoming the first jurisdiction in the country to install red light cameras," a 2001 report from the Office of the House Majority leader stated (view report). "In other words, the father of the red light camera in America is the same individual offering the 'objective' testimony that they are effective."
As of September 29, Retting was no longer employed by the Insurance Institute. He now works for Sam Schwartz Engineering, a toll road consulting firm.
Article Excerpt:
Analysis Violates Principles of Sound Research & Public Health Evaluation
October 30, 2008
by John T Large, Assistant Professor University of South Florida, Barbara Orban, Etienne Pracht
The study by Retting and Kyrychenko concluding red-light cameras (RLCs) were effective in reducing total and injury crashes [Ref.1], was subsequently reported to be seriously flawed. Burkey and Obeng provide an excellent critique of the deficiencies including the incorrect reporting of results [Ref.2]. Despite this, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), which is funded by automobile insurance companies, funded the Retting and Kyrychenko study and has continued to use the study in their efforts to advance public policy in favor of RLCs [Ref.3-7]; hence, the importance of ascertaining the study's validity.
The regression analysis of Retting and Kyrychenko [Ref.1] does not support their conclusion that RLCs reduced total or injury crashes. We replicated Retting and Kyrychenko's analysis and verified Burkey and Obeng's critique [Ref.2]. Their regression analysis was simply the use of 16 observational units with 12 dummy variables (df = 3). Retting and Kyrychenko1 attempted to measure red-light camera effectiveness by comparing intersections in a single city that installed cameras (Oxnard, California) with three cities that did not. The variable of interest, labeled "camera," included all 125 signalized intersections in Oxnard, of which 11 had a camera in one approach direction and 114 had no cameras installed. The comparison case in the regression analysis was non-signalized intersections in Oxnard. As such, the "camera" finding merely represents the difference in crude accident growth rates between signalized and non-signalized intersections in Oxnard.
Contrary to the reported results, our calculated difference in the crude growth rates (p = 0.061) was not significant at the 0.05 level. Retting and Kyrychenko incorrectly reported a p-value of 0.0281 for the "camera" variable [Ref.1]. The estimated coefficient (-0.07296) for the "camera" variable in our replicated study matches Retting and Kyrychenko's, but the p-values and degrees of freedom differ. Their rebuttal to Burkey and Obeng was that the signalized/non-signalized variable was statistically insignificant in their initial model and dropped from the model, leaving four degrees of freedom to the error [Ref.8]. However, this was not explained in their methods section and is incorrect since this variable was significant in the initial model (p = 0.00051). Further, when excluding the signalized intersection variable, the coefficient for their "camera" variable is still non- significant (p = 0.2131).
The Oxnard RLC study violates many basic principles of sound statistical public health research and lacks internal and external validity. First, the RLC "treated" intersections were not separately analyzed. Second, the purpose of RLCs is to reduce crashes due to red-light running and yet red-light running crashes were not analyzed. Third, the authors admit to deviating from the methods described. Of most concern, the study's reported statistical results cannot be replicated. All RLC investigations should be scrutinized for adherence to applied research methods since studies with greater adherence to quasi-experimental research designs have concluded RLCs are associated with large increases in crashes [Ref.2,9] and since special interest groups with a financial stake in RLC use are actively working to influence public opinion and policy.
Sounds like Oxnard RLC has been taking lessons from NHTSA, D.O.T. and M.S.F.Second Ohio City Votes to Ban Red Light Cameras
Cincinnati joins Steubenville as the second Ohio city to ban photo enforcement by referendum.
The residents of Cincinnati, Ohio made it clear Tuesday that photo enforcement is not welcome in the city. A majority of voters approved an amendment to the city charter prohibiting local officials from ever installing either red light cameras or speed cameras (view text). Referendum co-sponsor Josh Weitzman hopes his coalition's victory inspires other cities.
"We worked long an hard to win," Weitzman told TheNewspaper. "This election is further proof that people do not want to have traffic cameras. Politicians in cities across the country need to take note of this if they plan on getting re-elected."
Cincinnati city council members had been trying for the past four years to install the devices that promised to generate between $2 million and $12 million in annual revenue. Advocates were stopped in 2005 when former Mayor Charlie Luken vetoed a camera ordinance saying, "Let's be honest with the public -- we didn't think about this until we came up with a budget problem."
The push for red light cameras resumed at the end of that year when Mayor Mark Mallory was sworn in. A diverse group of political activists from all ends of the political spectrum banded together to form the "We Demand a Vote" coalition to stop the idea. Members include regional chapters of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP), the Republican Party, the Green Party, the Libertarian Party, and others. The group received more than 10,000 signatures on a petition to put the subject of cameras on the ballot before the devices even had a chance to issue a single ticket. Political leaders quickly backed off their support of cameras after seeing public opinion on the matter.
In 2006, three out of every four voters in Steubenville chose to kick out speed cameras after the devices had issued $600,000 in citations. Over the past twelve years, voters in Anchorage, Alaska; Peoria, Arizona and Batavia, Illinois have also banned cameras.
and the lesson is ? If we holler loud enough, if we act, if we don't sit around wringing our hands going woe is me and bitching "after the fact" THEY WILL LISTEN!
MORE INFO ON RED LIGHT CAMERAS AND CAMERAS:
Red light Cameras 2 It's not just about running red lights anymore
More on Redlight Cameras 1 and how the state uses law against you
Coming soon to a town near you Red Light Cameras have quotas
Florida can top Californias Red light insanity anyday
UK defends spying in the name of Global warming when it is all ...
More on the invasiveness of Camera monitoring systems=infringing ...
Oh my God it has gotten worse than air fresheners-Florida on the ...
Fourth Amendment - Search and Seizure
Amendment Text
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.MORE ON THE FOURTH AMENDMENT
Conformities are called for much more eagerly today than yesterday... skeptics, liberals, individuals with a taste for private life and their own inner standards of behavior, are objects of fear and derision and targets of persecution for either side... in the great ideological wars of our time. ISAIAH BERLIN
Anonymous pamphlets, leaflets, brochures and even books have played an important role in the progress of mankind. Persecuted groups and sects from time to time throughout history have been able to criticize the oppressive practices and laws either anonymously or not at all... It is plain that anonymity has sometimes been assumed for the most constructive purposes. JUSTICE HUGO BLACK
They: The makers of the Constitution: conferred, as against the government, the right to be let alone -- the most comprehensive of rights and the right most valued by civilized men. JUSTICE LOUIS BRANDEIS
Ways may someday be developed by which the government, without removing papers from secret drawers, can reproduce them in court, and by which it will be enabled to expose to a jury the most intimate occurrences of the home. JUSTICE LOUIS BRANDEIS
Could this dude see the future or what? Over time the greatest minds that have ever lived have discussed, debated and argued Freedom and Liberty. It's greatest enemy is fear. And most often fear generated by ignorance.rcAdd to Technorati Favorites
Noise ordinance workshop Panama CIty Beach today
Diana has sent out the following workshop package for the Noise Ordinance workshop to be held at 4:30 pm today in Panama City Beach. A suggestion if you do not wish another HB137 to happen is to be there if you can.
http://www.pcbgov.com/uploads/ordinances/187/file/111308.NoiseOrdWkshRegMtg.pdf
City Hall: 110 S. Arnold Road Panama City Beach, Florida 32413 | Phone: 850-233-5100 | Fax: 850-233-5108Add to Technorati Favorites
http://www.pcbgov.com/uploads/ordinances/187/file/111308.NoiseOrdWkshRegMtg.pdf
City Hall: 110 S. Arnold Road Panama City Beach, Florida 32413 | Phone: 850-233-5100 | Fax: 850-233-5108Add to Technorati Favorites
If Gov. Christ ain't careful I could begin to like him
Health Care Advocates Want Helmetless Riders To Carry More Insurance
Wednesday, November 12, 2008 – updated: 5:15 pm EST November 12, 2008
WFTV News
for the full story
Motorcycle riders who don’t wear helmets are running up big bills in Central Florida hospitals. The cost to treat riders jumped from $20-million in 2005 to $40-million in 2007.
Health care advocates want to force those riders who don’t protect themselves to carry more insurance. Supporters say it makes sense and would save taxpayers millions. But the idea isn’t getting support from Governor Crist.
Denybeth Carrillo almost lost her life in a motorcycle accident.
“They thought I was dead. I wasn’t breathing and I didn’t have a pulse," said Carrillo.
She was thrown from the back her boyfriend's motorcycle on I-4 in January. Neither of them was wearing a helmet. Hector Sierra died instantly. Carrillo's neck was injured in three places. Her treatment and rehab to learn to walk again were expensive.
“Close to a million dollars. It’s really high, especially because I didn't have any type of insurance,” said Carrillo.
She isn’t alone. One-third of Florida riders don’t have insurance. Many others only have the state minimum of $10,000, even though the average hospital cost for a motorcycle injury is $43,000.
That’s why some state lawmakers want to require helmetless riders to buy more insurance.
Governor Crist doesn't like the idea.
“I believe in freedom," he said. "I think individuals should make that choice. People can buy more insurance if they want to, and it’s a free market."
Wow, that came out of a politicians mouth. You go Gov.Add to Technorati Favorites
Wednesday, November 12, 2008 – updated: 5:15 pm EST November 12, 2008
WFTV News
for the full story
Motorcycle riders who don’t wear helmets are running up big bills in Central Florida hospitals. The cost to treat riders jumped from $20-million in 2005 to $40-million in 2007.
Health care advocates want to force those riders who don’t protect themselves to carry more insurance. Supporters say it makes sense and would save taxpayers millions. But the idea isn’t getting support from Governor Crist.
Denybeth Carrillo almost lost her life in a motorcycle accident.
“They thought I was dead. I wasn’t breathing and I didn’t have a pulse," said Carrillo.
She was thrown from the back her boyfriend's motorcycle on I-4 in January. Neither of them was wearing a helmet. Hector Sierra died instantly. Carrillo's neck was injured in three places. Her treatment and rehab to learn to walk again were expensive.
“Close to a million dollars. It’s really high, especially because I didn't have any type of insurance,” said Carrillo.
She isn’t alone. One-third of Florida riders don’t have insurance. Many others only have the state minimum of $10,000, even though the average hospital cost for a motorcycle injury is $43,000.
That’s why some state lawmakers want to require helmetless riders to buy more insurance.
Governor Crist doesn't like the idea.
“I believe in freedom," he said. "I think individuals should make that choice. People can buy more insurance if they want to, and it’s a free market."
“I believe in freedom," he said. "I think individuals should make that choice."
Wow, that came out of a politicians mouth. You go Gov.Add to Technorati Favorites
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)