Traffic cameras are a scam - and unconstitutional

Kudos go out to the Hamilton County judge who found a small village in contempt for violating his previous order against using cameras to catch speeders.  It’s nice to see a judge call traffic enforcement cameras what they are – a scam.

Of course, the usual list of municipalities and police departments are crying about how the cameras lead to less traffic accidents and increase safety, but here’s a news flash – no one buys that load of bull.

Traffic cameras have always been about one thing – raising money and fleecing the public.  Cities and police departments that are strapped financially found a cash cow in camera manufactures who provide the cameras free of charge in return for a cut of the profits.

Despite rulings by the Ohio Supreme Court, reasonable, rationale people who aren’t lawyers looking for a loophole know that traffic cameras are unfair and unconstitutional.  Owners of vehicles can be ticketed even if they aren’t driving the vehicle.  Drivers have no ability to confront their accuser and no way to challenge that the camera is working properly.

And drivers who get caught by traffic cameras are treated differently – as a civil matter and with no points on their driving record – than the poor sap who gets a ticket a block away at the hands of a real police officer.  Isn’t equal protection under the law a constitutional right?  Apparently not when it comes to traffic cameras in Ohio.

I’ve gotten a speeding ticket from a camera in a local municipality.  I sent it back to them with a note saying there was no way in hell I was going to pay it – and I meant it.

Thankfully, the Ohio legislature has gotten the message loud and clear.  The House passed a bill this week banning the cameras, and the Senate will likely pass the measure after the summer recess.

Then we can wait for the next scam that government tries to pull in the name of safety when the real reason is revenue.

Air show fun overshadowed by tragedy

The 2013 Dayton Air Show is in the books, and this year was both a ton of fun, yet marred by tragedy.  I had the opportunity on Thursday to fly in a lead plane above Sean D. Tucker and took the above video and some great photos.  On Friday I got to fly with the Aeroshell Aerobatic team and man, what a rush!  I never knew what 4Gs were until I couldn't lift my camera up off my lap.

Unfortunately, on Saturday wing walker Jane Wicker and her pilot, Charlie Schwenker, were killed in an accident.  I wasn't there on Saturday, and I'm thankful for that, but I have to say, it changed the way I saw the show on Sunday.

Every time one of the aerobatic pilots did a maneuver that looked odd - even though it was part of their act - the thought was in the back of my head whether it was supposed to be part of the act.  Fortunately, they were, and nothing happened on Sunday, but there was definite unease.

Unfortunate as well was the gutting federal sequestration did to what is usually one of the top air shows in the nation.  It affected the quality of the show and the attendance - brutally.

The highlight for me and my family was meeting one of the Tuskegee Airmen and being able to thank him for his service to our nation.  He was an incredibly nice man, and gracious with Daniel and taking photos.  

The air show, the parade, and getting to spend Sunday with my friends at the City of Vandalia made for a great time for me and my family.

Thoughts on the Supreme Court DOMA ruling

I know many of my friends will disagree with me, but I think the Supreme Court got it right in striking down the Defense of Marriage Act.  I know many in the Church have decried the ruling, but I come at it from a little different perspective.

First, I'm a big believer in Federalism - a not so aptly named concept that is intended to limit the power of the central government and defer to the states.  It's how our system of government was intended to be and has seriously been eroded over the past 60 years or so.

Federalism was upheld by the DOMA ruling.  The majority said that a federal law cannot trump the decisions made in the individual states that have voted on the issue.  That's an important thing to remember, and could have a bearing on another controversial topic which I'll touch on in a minute.

The second reason I agree with the ruling is that I believe the separation of Church and State should be absolute.  I don't want the government interfering in the Church, and although I'm not Catholic and don't subscribe to their stance on birth control, I still believe they have a right to hold to their tenets of faith without government rule or regulation interference.  Hence I believe they are right in fighting HHS mandates that would require them to violate those beliefs that exist under Obamacare.

Because I believe that Church and State should not impose on each other, I would absolutely oppose any notion that the Church should condone and perform same-sex marriages.  Government has never made that case and likely never will.

But civil marriage is just that - a civil ceremony.  A legal act.  It seems inherently unconstitutional and unfair to say to one set of people that they cannot marry, and as an extension, cannot enjoy the same benefits (financial, social etc.) that come with marriage just because they are gay.

I'm actually surprised that the ruling was not 6-3 or 7-2 because I thought Chief Justice Roberts would rule with the majority.

At the end of the day, the issue will be decided where it should be - in the states.

And that brings me to one other controversial issue that, until 1973, was settled in the states.  At least until the Supreme Court used some creative gerrymandering to create an exception.  Roe vs. Wade took abortion, which until that time was a state issue, decided state by state, and made it a national issue decided by the Court.

This ruling today would seem to open up that case for review if for no other reason than the logic that federal laws cannot over rule states.

I pray that is so. 

My first blog entry

I've decided to do something I've wanted to do for a while - start a blog.  I don't really know what my plans are, and I'm not even sure anyone really cares what I have to say about anything.  And I'm ok with that!

I write every day for a living for a small community paper in Southwestern Ohio.  I get to write some opinion pieces, and I'll share some of them here.  Other items may be family stuff, others may be political or religion, or whatever else I want to say.

There will likely be posts about the new puppy as well, who proves to be very entertaining.  This is him at the Air Show Parade last week.  He was the hit of the parade!

I'll certainly share some great writing of other people far more talented than I am...beyond that, well I guess we will see what happens!