<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Government Should Serve Citizens</title>
	<atom:link href="http://blog.shirl.com/2008/04/02/government-should-serve-citizens/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://blog.shirl.com/2008/04/02/government-should-serve-citizens/</link>
	<description>bare pate roue</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Mar 2010 17:33:57 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Lyndell</title>
		<link>http://blog.shirl.com/2008/04/02/government-should-serve-citizens/comment-page-1/#comment-804</link>
		<dc:creator>Lyndell</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2008 05:09:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.shirl.com/?p=521#comment-804</guid>
		<description>I stop for green lights now, and don&#039;t turn on reds at these intersections.  Interestingly, seems these intersection were the first to be fixed, or never went offline after the hurricane.  

In the videos from these cameras posted on Chron.com, I saw police and Metro buses in the footage running reds.  The only collision I saw in the footage was a fender bender becuase someone stopped, then creeped into the intersection.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I stop for green lights now, and don&#8217;t turn on reds at these intersections.  Interestingly, seems these intersection were the first to be fixed, or never went offline after the hurricane.  </p>
<p>In the videos from these cameras posted on Chron.com, I saw police and Metro buses in the footage running reds.  The only collision I saw in the footage was a fender bender becuase someone stopped, then creeped into the intersection.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee</title>
		<link>http://blog.shirl.com/2008/04/02/government-should-serve-citizens/comment-page-1/#comment-324</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Apr 2008 13:07:07 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.shirl.com/?p=521#comment-324</guid>
		<description>Yellow light-length is a much better argument. And unfortunately, it&#039;s the first time I&#039;ve heard it made. Every other time I&#039;ve had this discussion with someone, it&#039;s always been about how the government is supposedly using them to spy on us. Not that there aren&#039;t elements in the government spying on us, I just don&#039;t think they&#039;re doing it with traffic cameras.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yellow light-length is a much better argument. And unfortunately, it&#8217;s the first time I&#8217;ve heard it made. Every other time I&#8217;ve had this discussion with someone, it&#8217;s always been about how the government is supposedly using them to spy on us. Not that there aren&#8217;t elements in the government spying on us, I just don&#8217;t think they&#8217;re doing it with traffic cameras.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: bshirley</title>
		<link>http://blog.shirl.com/2008/04/02/government-should-serve-citizens/comment-page-1/#comment-322</link>
		<dc:creator>bshirley</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 18:01:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.shirl.com/?p=521#comment-322</guid>
		<description>Lee,

What all that was leading up to is that cities are setting up these cameras on lights that have entirely too short yellow light cycles.

If they&#039;re interested in your safety, they should lengthen the yellows.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lee,</p>
<p>What all that was leading up to is that cities are setting up these cameras on lights that have entirely too short yellow light cycles.</p>
<p>If they&#8217;re interested in your safety, they should lengthen the yellows.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lee</title>
		<link>http://blog.shirl.com/2008/04/02/government-should-serve-citizens/comment-page-1/#comment-321</link>
		<dc:creator>Lee</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 17:14:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.shirl.com/?p=521#comment-321</guid>
		<description>Please allow me to offer the friendly rebuttal:

Maybe red-light runners aren&#039;t a problem in Houston, but they damn sure are in Austin. I&#039;m sick of it. And since I&#039;m often commuting on my bicycle, it&#039;s not just a matter of a fender-bender for me â€“ it could mean broken bones or much, much worse.

And I don&#039;t buy the &quot;surveillance on the populace&quot; argument at all. Bottom line: If you&#039;re in a place where a red-light camera can photograph you -- i.e., the middle of an intersection -- then you are in PUBLIC. While we do retain minimal privacy rights while out in public, the fact is, you give up most of them the second you set foot out the door.

You are driving a publicly registered vehicle on a publicly financed road and engaging in a publicly regulated activity. If people want privacy, they need to stay in a PRIVATE place, such as their home.

If the police stationed an officer at that light to watch for red-light runners, how would that be any different? In fact, I think most citizens would applaud his/her being there. Every time I see one of those red-light runners I wish so bad I could make a cop instantly appear, like a genie from a bottle. Why do some people get so upset when the real cop is replaced by a mechanical one?

If the government wanted to set up cameras to spy on our private lives or to peer inside private property, I&#039;d be with you. But what you&#039;re talking about with traffic lights is exactly the opposite.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Please allow me to offer the friendly rebuttal:</p>
<p>Maybe red-light runners aren&#8217;t a problem in Houston, but they damn sure are in Austin. I&#8217;m sick of it. And since I&#8217;m often commuting on my bicycle, it&#8217;s not just a matter of a fender-bender for me â€“ it could mean broken bones or much, much worse.</p>
<p>And I don&#8217;t buy the &#8220;surveillance on the populace&#8221; argument at all. Bottom line: If you&#8217;re in a place where a red-light camera can photograph you &#8212; i.e., the middle of an intersection &#8212; then you are in PUBLIC. While we do retain minimal privacy rights while out in public, the fact is, you give up most of them the second you set foot out the door.</p>
<p>You are driving a publicly registered vehicle on a publicly financed road and engaging in a publicly regulated activity. If people want privacy, they need to stay in a PRIVATE place, such as their home.</p>
<p>If the police stationed an officer at that light to watch for red-light runners, how would that be any different? In fact, I think most citizens would applaud his/her being there. Every time I see one of those red-light runners I wish so bad I could make a cop instantly appear, like a genie from a bottle. Why do some people get so upset when the real cop is replaced by a mechanical one?</p>
<p>If the government wanted to set up cameras to spy on our private lives or to peer inside private property, I&#8217;d be with you. But what you&#8217;re talking about with traffic lights is exactly the opposite.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Big AL</title>
		<link>http://blog.shirl.com/2008/04/02/government-should-serve-citizens/comment-page-1/#comment-320</link>
		<dc:creator>Big AL</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Apr 2008 11:54:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://blog.shirl.com/?p=521#comment-320</guid>
		<description>This kind of reminds me of safety nazi....

For example, if you look at highway stats, and what causes accidents, it is skewed....investigators can write anything down as the cause...and even multiple things....so the number add up to more than 100%.....

So when you see a stat that say 50% of accidents are caused by bla bla bla....it really mean that that MIGHT have been a factor.....

For example SPEED doesn&#039;t cause an accident.....there MUST be some other contributing factor.....some driver MUST make another mistake for there to be an accident....now I will admit that speed will increade the likelyhood of an injury.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This kind of reminds me of safety nazi&#8230;.</p>
<p>For example, if you look at highway stats, and what causes accidents, it is skewed&#8230;.investigators can write anything down as the cause&#8230;and even multiple things&#8230;.so the number add up to more than 100%&#8230;..</p>
<p>So when you see a stat that say 50% of accidents are caused by bla bla bla&#8230;.it really mean that that MIGHT have been a factor&#8230;..</p>
<p>For example SPEED doesn&#8217;t cause an accident&#8230;..there MUST be some other contributing factor&#8230;..some driver MUST make another mistake for there to be an accident&#8230;.now I will admit that speed will increade the likelyhood of an injury.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
