When are they going to put camera's in the City council Chamber and the 5th floor office of Mayor Damencia! The camera's have proven inaffective in stopping gang violence, but have become a real money maker for the Daley administration. The gangs like Daley and the Alderman have figured out not to steal in front of the camera. The street sweeper idea is another invasion of our privacy! Get rid of thses Orwell tools and the mayor that brought them in!

the only thing that the scumbag bureaucrats of chicago know how to do well ... is to tax and fine the hell out of the people here. every nickel that they can get away with.

I knew these cameras were only going to get worse. Bring it on, I'll probably leave this damn city anyways before the olympics come into town.

Looks like the lowest pay rate are the violators in Mexican neighborhoods. Guess if you are an illegal alien, you have no qualms about running a red light. Or maybe the tickets should be mailed in Spanish ?

These light are great for America! I love America! Chicago is Broke and we need the money!

If you can't pay the fine don't do the crime.

Hey Coconate!! Personally I was against the Mayor coming down on you the way he did. Can you put a good word in for me with Frank Avila. I might need him down the road. If need any thing just call.

We should put a camera on the 5th floor or in Daley's car and catch him stealing all our money.

They should of put a camera on Victor Reyes.

VERY interesting piece. Although, the city claims there are currently 104 red light camera intersections, with potentially another 120 to come by 2012.

Just remember, no matter what the city says, red light cameras are about revenue first, safety...a distant second.

I won't be surprised if they eventually decide to pull the red light camera at the intersection of Halsted and Belmont--200 tickets? Unless it was installed April 29th, 2008, it can't be profitable enough for the city to have it at that intersection.

Our website, The Expired Meter,(www.theexpiredmeter.com) is a website devoted to fighting Chicago parking tickets and is running a series of weekly articles on avoiding red light camera tickets.

If you want some decent advice on how to avoid red light camera tickets, check out the site.

With his boyfriends Tony & His Anti-Sobriety Test Offspring Marko, Going to New Town.

Coconut that is.........

Re: The Parking Ticket Geek-- These figures come from the city, but I received them a few weeks ago, so you're probably right about the higher camera count. It looks like we're moving toward having them at every traffic-light intersection.

Mick-My contact down at OEMC says they city's goal is to have 10% of all Chicago intersections with red light cameras by 2012, which accounts for the additional 120 by that date.

The city claims an average 59% reduction in red light running at all camera intersections, which is a good thing. But I am researching whether there has been an increase in rear-end collisions at camera intersections because of the photo-enforcement. Some studies and pro-motorist organizations claim incidents of rear-end collisions increase because of the cameras.

One last thing people should know, Chicago's yellow light interval, while still legally acceptable by federal standards, is on the very, very short end of those standards. The feds suggest a 4 second yellow light interval, while we here in Chicago have a 3-second. Studies have shown pretty concretely that extending the yellow light interval by even 1 second results in substantial decreased red light running.

So, if the city was truly serious about safety, they would go ahead and increase the yellow light interval to 4 seconds. However, that would most probably decrease ticket revenue.

The moral of the story is...it's about the money not safety.

My apologies to my long-winded prattling.

http://www.frankcoconate.com/ Daley is a mean stinker.

Holy Batshit!!!!, Underdog!!!!.

The gems just keep coming from:


http://secondcitycop.blogspot.com/



"Whether you agree with me or not, these are my views. Weis was hired by Daley and knew his background.

Every command change probably came from city hall.

Daley screwed up and has but himself to blame.

You can make anyone a top boss anywhere, even if they have no clue what the business does. What you need is a competent staff to guide you with the best decisions to run that company, even if it's the police department.

The problem is all the command staff that had any knowledge was busted or launched.

The fault does not lie with the Superintendent. He was hired to root out corruption.

Unfortunately the Superintendent was never a street cop and does not have the background to run the department effectively. I'm not saying he is not trying, but someone with actual street experience in a city this large would have done better.

The mayor is the one to blame.

He hired Weis to root out corruption. Superintendent Weis may be qualified for that but not everyday problems of policing and planning. When he came in he sought the resignations of top brass that were highly qualified in handling day to day police activities. He replaced almost every district Commander with people that for the most part didn't have the background for command experience.

He replaced major command staff with people who were less qualified than those replaced.

The department is dangerously short manpower and constantly borrowing police from other districts when a district has major incidents tying up the cars from the district involved. We have units that instead of patrolling just some areas and not handling calls when they should be assigned to patrol to answer the calls in all districts.

The CAPS program is a useless waste of manpower in the districts. The 5-15 police officers assigned to the CAPS program in districts and at headquarters should be on returned to patrol and CAPS should be disbanded. All it is there for is show.

It does nothing to reduce crime.

The fact the mayor brought in someone who took a police officer who was disciplined years ago for an incident, then had federal charges brought against him effected every police officer.

The police now are in fear of doing proactive police work, which results in complaints, even though they are unsubstantiated.

Now the feeling is even though you get a complaint and you are found not at fault, what is there to stop it being re-opened in the future and you are found in violation even though the complaint was unfounded.

I know we have had a rash of corruption and major violation with certain police officers, but that doesn't mean you go after every police officer in the department.

99 percent of police are honest and believe in the job they do.

We needed a Superintendent that knew the streets and still fight corruption in the department where it is necessary, but not blanket the whole department.

We needed a Superintendent that knew the supervisors and their backgrounds personally.

When you make major command changes without knowing the person's background, you are asking for problems. That and the fact you pushed out command staff that had the knowledge to guide the department and advise the Superintendent correctly because of their vast knowledge hurt the department even further.

The mayor may fault the Superintendent, but the fault lies in the fact that the problem started when a Superintendent was hired who did not have the knowledge of the workings of the police and the background of being a police officer on the street.

I doubt if the input for all the command changes and the loss of highly qualified high ranking supervisors was just the choice of the superintendent and not with the help of the mayor.

7/11/2008 02:03:00 PM"

we don't need a superintendent that is from the old mold. the old mold stinks and has become worse over the past 20 years the mayor has run this town into the ground.

The new superintendent is doing a great job and it shows bc the police are pissed off that someone is holding them accountnable for once and the 'outsider' FBI guy doesn't care if he hurt their feelings.

Try reading the blog:


http://secondcitycop.blogspot.com/



The problems are much more complicated than "...the police are pissed off that someone is holding them accountable for once and the 'outsider' FBI guy doesn't care if he hurt their feelings.", though, one could accurately sum them up as 'Political patronage has infested the CPD as thoroughly as it has infested every city and county governmental body'.

And THAT'S what has pissed off the majority of WORKING police officers.


Read the blog.

For the 2011 campaign of Jesse Jackson Jr for Mayor, Huh????????. Sounding conservative, But being a weak-kneed liberal in reality...

to be so stupid as to not recognize the tip of the iceberg is not the whole iceberg.

And the daley ship of fools is steaming, full speed ahead, right into it.

With no lifeboats on board.

And some say that there is no God......

So much wisdom and common sense, it's amazing:


"Hey Department Heads, Politicians, Fake Reverends, and Good Citizens of Chicago.

You want officers to make arrests and crime to go down?

Meet these demands and I guarantee you that crime will go down and police morale will go up.

1. Give us a decent contract with a raise and benefits that show the police are appreciated for the work and sacrifices they do day in and out.

2. Get rid of J-FED.

3. Lift residency.

4. No meritorious promotions unless an office was shot or performed an heroic act.

5. No more bullshit Cr#'s.

6. City must file charges against any person who signs a false affidavits.

7. No more TRR's.

8. Do not settle bogus lawsuits, and fight them.

9. Monetary caps on lawsuits.

10. Remove politics out of the police department.
We are here to maintain law and order and not worry about how our actions will cost a politician some votes.
In other words the Mayor doesn't select the Superintendent, is awarded a non voidable contract, District Commanders are not selected by Aldermen, and reverends have no say in police policies.

11. A pursuit policy! Why should law abiding citizens get hammered all the time with citations because they obey the law and pull over for lights and sirens and the shitheads just run, never get cited, or arrested.
What ever happen to equal enforcement under the law?

12. Decent equipment.

13. A five day or four day work schedule.

14. St. Judes back on Michigan Av.

15. Knowledgeable bosses that have your back.

16. (Fill in the blank)

Remember citizens in order for police to accomplish their jobs requires 3 things from the community.

1. Is respect,

2. A presence in their community and

3. Fear.

People don't like or respect the police and do not want them in their communities but feared the police in that if they committed a crime knew they would be hauled off to jail and if resisted arrest would end up in the emergency room.

Now they don't even fear us, that is in part to you the good citizens that do not back and support your police.

The media, politicians, and reverends also took the fear out of the police.

In order for us to do our jobs we have to have at least one of the three things I just mentioned.

We already know that we will never be respected or wanted in bad parts of the city.

But we can make them fear us again thus allowing us to do our jobs and thus reducing crime in Chicago.

Until the CPD is allowed to put the fear of God into these MF's crime will continue to get worse before it gets better.

This is what you all wanted, now will you allow us to fix it?

7/14/2008 12:25:00 PM"


From: http://secondcitycop.blogspot.com/

"Hiya all.

Pro-2nd-amendment lawyer type here, and just wanted to give you guys a bit of food for thought. This weekend I read the DC/Heller Supreme Court case. I'm not a constitutional scholar, but here's what I got out of it.

A. Big rule: you cannot blanket-ban the ownership or possession ("bear") of weapons commonly used in the U.S. for lawful purposes of self defense etc.

Thus, you cannot blanket-ban handguns or rifles or shotguns, though you can ban sawed-off shotguns, or tanks or bazookas or mortars.

Thus, you cannot ban ownership and possession of these weapons in homes, whatsoever, though you can ban for instance concealed-carry in public (in which case you presumably MUST allow open-carry in public) and vice versa.

Thus, you cannot ban ownership and possession across broad portions of the population (for instance, those who were not sworn), except that you may ban ownership and possession by felons and the mentally ill.

And you can ban guns from "sensitive" places like schools and government buildings.

To be very clear, the reason I raise this here is because it seems quite clear that the U.S. Supreme Court just stated, in no uncertain terms, that any law blanket-prohibiting ownership or possession of weapons in Chicago is unconstitutional.

So if you arrest someone for firing a weapon, fine. If you arrest someone for carrying a weapon? Well, that latter one is gonna be a problem until Chicago passes a new and constitutional ordinance.

And the brain trusts at headquarters, City Hall, the State's Attorney's office and other bastions of the Cook County Democratic party?

Hate to say it, but there are boatloads of charges in the system that are gonna have to be tossed. I hope none of you are out there stepping on the constitution in an effort to make Daley proud.

Like I said above, the City and State can implement a few types of regulations on who, what and where, but carrying, whether on the street or in the home, cannot be blanket-banned.

Good luck and please be safe.

7/14/2008 12:06:00 PM"


From, (you guessed it):

http://secondcitycop.blogspot.com/

Sorry guys, in my original, earlier post, somehow the link got messed up.

Here's the proper link to The Expired Meter.

http://www.theexpiredmeter.com

Like I said earlier, we are running a series of articles on tactics and strategies for avoiding red light camera tickets.

I'm glad the cameras aren't in my bedroom!

Clout Monkeys.

Because:

Someone has to eat the politicians' shit and like it.