License
covers could cancel out red-light cameras
Wilmington
considers outlawing plate-obscuring devices sold on Internet
By ADAM TAYLOR
Staff reporter
12/02/2002
The
courtroom is not the only place motorists can try to beat
Wilmington's red-light cameras.
They also can go to the Internet, where companies sell
a spray and plastic covers designed to prevent the cameras
from clearly capturing the letters and numbers on license
plates as drivers zip through red lights.
City
and state officials said the products could become an
effective counter to the high-tech cameras. There is no
city law that prohibits their use, and there is nothing
on the state books to ban them, either.
"Technology
is ahead of us," Delaware Deputy Attorney General
Jim Hanley said.
That
is good news to John Brown, a 76-year-old Wilmington resident
who recently lost his appeal of a $75 ticket issued after
one of the cameras caught him. Brown said he thinks the
city installed the devices simply to make money.
He
said he was unaware of the new products, but "they
sound great."
There
are 10 cameras in Wilmington and 10 more will be installed
soon. Twenty additional cameras will be installed across
Delaware next year, said Albert Guckes, aide to state
Transportation Secretary Nathan Hayward III.
More
than 40,000 people in Wilmington have been ticketed by
the cameras in 18 months. If motorists speed to buy the
spray and plate covers, city officials said, they will
floor it to City Hall to outlaw the products.
Councilman
Gerald L. Brady said officials from Affiliated Computer
Services Inc., the company that operates the cameras for
the city, have told him that the products could pose a
problem.
"It's something that we are tracking," he said.
"I would introduce a bill to ban anything that would
obscure the camera's view and impede the judicial process."
Wilmington
Communications Director John Rago said there is no evidence
that any photographs have been blurred by motorists who
have used the products. Joe Scott, said purchases by Delawareans
from the Harrisburg, Pa., company's Web site have been
brisk, but he would not provide sales figures.
The
cameras are connected to underground sensors at the stop
lights of the intersections. The sensor activates when
a vehicle approaches at a high rate of speed when the
light is red. Pictures of the vehicle are taken before
it goes through the intersection and after it goes through
the red light.
Our
technology is simpler, Scott said. The $29.99 Photo Blocker
spray is a high-gloss material that makes a glare when
light hits it, blocking the plate's tag numbers in the
photograph.
The plates remain visible to the naked eye, said Scott,
who started his company six years ago.
"People
are sick and tired of these cameras," he said. "But
we don't condone anybody running red lights. It's like
Porsche, which makes a car to go 200 mph but is not responsible
for people driving that fast."
Jeff
Agnew, spokesman for the National Campaign to Stop Red
Light Running, an advocacy group that gets money from
companies that make and operate red-light camera equipment,
said the products hurt public safety.
"We
think this can undermine the deterrent effect of these
life-saving technologies," he said.
Wilmington, which splits part of the proceeds from the
tickets with Affiliated Computer Services, made $522,000
in the program's first year. But Rago said the cameras'
primary mission is to save lives, and he thinks they are
working. The cameras, which were placed at the most dangerous
intersections in the city, capture an average 60 percent
fewer violators now than when the program began.
Affiliated
Computer Services is competing to run the 20 cameras outside
Wilmington. Scott Kidner, a lobbyist for the company in
Dover, said Delaware's motorists will determine whether
city and state laws would be needed to ban the products.
"It's
a little too early to tell," he said. "If we
see an explosion of these products and a problem with
prosecuting people pops up, I can foresee a legislative
fix."
Whitney
Hoffman of Bear was ticketed twice in Wilmington, but
both cases were thrown out because of administrative problems
in the program's first months. She said an officer would
not have cited her for running the lights by one-tenth
of a second, which is what the cameras did.
But
she said she would not purchase the new products.
"This
should be about justice and fair play," she said.
"I don't think the cameras represent that, but I
don't feel the need to buy those things. I'm just extra
careful where I know the cameras are."
Copyright
© 2003 BeatTheCamera.com
- All Rights Reserved
BeatTheCamera™
is
an established Trade Mark