Major Fail? Texas Judge Claims Public Has No Right To Vote On Traffic Cameras

Jeebus folks, get with the program!!!
All these things are being put in place for your own protection.
After all it is a post 9/11 world...
And if you fight the system, the terrorists might win.

Well we know he is getting a cut.

"Well we know he is getting a cut"

Pray tell, from WHOM???? Of course, using my mind-bending spoon ability, I deduced you were referring to our fearless leader. I believe he is called the President of The United States of America, to YOU!

"Jeebus folks, get with the program!!!
All these things are being put in place for your own protection.
After all it is a post 9/11 world...
And if you fight the system, the terrorists might win."

If this is laced with sarcasm, I didn't see the "Lol" or the ":)"
If you truly believe this, there is NO comment I could possibly make! Wait, ... (nope, that was a gag!)

If you can't spot sarcasm...the terrorists win.

Funny!

I believe that's sarcasm, yet I can't help but feel that if any of those suggestions won a majority vote, that they should be implemented. It is what most people want. Hell, if a no tax/no govt programs vote ever won, I bet it would be better then the current system where the American government loans trillions of dollars to keep up with the wars/etc.

Legally...this was very savy of George Hittner.

Ethically...well this is about as unethical as law can get. This is one of those battles between the "Spirit" of the law vs the "Word" of law. What people somtimes don't understand is that the general populous vote counts for very little in any aspect of government. From the local level to the Federal level, we have put in place elected officials to make our decisions for us. And even when the majority of people band together to put a change to the system through...the system can stop it. Legally. We are not a Democracy...we are a Republic. This is one of those situations that brings that statement to the forefront. Majority dosen't rule. Which is supposed to protect the right of the individual...but usually ends up protecting the right of the company.

What's really nasty was this quote by the Hon. Judge Hughes: "The deadline is short, but the people have an alternative, recurring way to repeal an offending ordinance," Hughes wrote. "Since the referendum deadline passed, the city has held three general elections for the mayor and council. The same energy and organization that went into the effort to repeal the ordinance may be applied in future elections as an alternative to a referendum."

He in essence is telling the people to "pound sand" and that the only way anything will change is if you elect a different Mayor and City council.

"This is one of those battles between the "Spirit" of the law vs the "Word" of law"

And guess what wins??? Yeah, the WORD! The law has no ACTIONABLE spirit! It has discretion at times, but no actionable spirit!


"He in essence is telling the people to "pound sand" and that the only way anything will change is if you elect a different Mayor and City council."

And following the letter of the law (which is ALL he can do) his advice is LEGALLY correct! Don't like the rule, in a Republic, you change the rule maker!! Simple!! If the rule-maker has every legal right to make the rule, you cannot supersede his authority. The judge in my humble opinion is correct! He is actually giving folks the way to change the "system." Most judges would shoot down your argument and not offer any alternative! They don't have to....legally! A wise person would take counsel (that "aha" moment) and follow the judge's advice!!

LOL -- "waist"land !!!

I've got three kids in American schools and one in a German school.....both have flaws. too bad we cant mix the best of both.

i say put the cameras up and leave em up. cant count how many times a "blitzer" has flashed me here in Germany....burn anyone who blasts thru a red light.....I ride a bike; i'd love the added protection. ppl complain about privacy violation get no love. how many ppl complain about every other security camera they encounter? if you dont like the speed/red light cameras, then you dont like ATMs, getting gas, using banks, visiting supermarkets, etc.....

That's how they are doing it.Running a red light is an unsafe thing to do, and since red light cams make it simple to make sure individuals are penalized appropriately, the devices seem a fantastic investment. There are a number of people in residents with the cams, along with some area governments, that try to rid themselves of the cameras for a variety of reasons. People don’t like the cameras because they have to take out a <a title="Pay Day Loans For a Hairy Situation" href="http://personalmoneystore.com/payday-\loans/">payday loan</a> to pay for the unexpected fine.