Comment from: adam smith [Visitor] Email
Let's be realistic, speeding helps keep things moving. Think about it folks, how many of you actually drive 55 miles per hour or as slow as the 40 mile an hour limit on the highway? I don't think speeding is dangerous. I think excessive speeding can be if the driver can't drive very well, but why throw the baby out with the bath water? Our highways are clogged at the speeds we currently travel and people are talking about slowing them down an additional 20 miles an hour or so? Good luck. P.S. How many of you actually drive the 15-25 miles an hour posted on most town and city streets?
03/07/08 @ 19:46
Comment from: RK [Visitor] Email
The problem with the CT highways is that for the most part there are only 2 lanes throughout. So much construction and all that seems to happen is we get wider breakdown lanes.
03/07/08 @ 20:50
Comment from: Jim [Visitor] Email
Don't ever let your spouse/signiicant other drive your car. The tickets are issued to the plate, not the driver.
03/07/08 @ 22:03
Comment from: John Calandrella [Visitor] Email
Stop wasting money on a technology that will be filled with disputes and just put a REAL cop out there.......
03/08/08 @ 06:58
Comment from: JAY [Visitor] Email
*----
What next in Jodi's version of 1984. I know, let's micro-chip every resident. Bet just the thought of that excites her!


03/08/08 @ 07:25
Comment from: bill phoenix [Visitor] Email
YES THE CAMERAS WORK IT HAS SLOWED TRAFFIC DOWN A GREAT DEAL IN AREAS WHERE IT IS USED. WE TO HAD POLITICAL STONEWALLING[THEY WHERE VOTED OUT].THE HIGHWAYS ARE TO CROUDED FOR IDIOTS TO USE AS THEIR NASCAR TRACK. YES MORE POLICE WOULD BE GREAT,BUT THERE IS ALWAYS FOUR OR MORE AT A BAD ACCIDENT[SOME NOT ON PATROL],AND SOME JUST WONT DO THEIR JOBS. CAMERAS ARE IMPARTIAL AND YES THEY DO SLOW PEOPLE DOWN. WANT PROVE CHECK A.Z. D.P.S.
03/08/08 @ 07:46
Comment from: jd [Visitor] Email
Camera's are not the answer.I wish someone would ask this fascist governor who are the people really benefiting from this idea. 1.Vendors installing cameras 2.Insurance companies 3.criminal politicians 4.lawyers(big surprise here!).
I would also like her to explain how a violator is supposed to cross examine their accuser(constitutional right).How is one supposed to question a camera? Whatever happened to discretion and at what speeds would summons be issued? To further trample on the peoples rights I understand a summons would be issued to the registered owner. The last time I checked everyone is accountable for their OWN actions and not someone elses. This idea is tyranny at its finest and I just hope we have enough right minded people who will say no to these revenue making gimmicks which only target the honest and hardworking citizens.
03/08/08 @ 11:22
Comment from: DougN [Visitor] Email
***--
I don't feel that cameras on the highway are going to be an accurate way to enforce speed limits due to the issue mentioned earlier of who is the driver and who owns the car. I do like the fact that traffic flow and congestion are a centerstage issue for the state and that ideas are coming forward to the table. My suggestion would be to re-analyze speed zones and traffic flow in order to adjust limits accordingly. Some low traveled country roads have too low of a speed limit while some highly traveled roads need another lane. Lowering the speed limit down from 65 to 55 would create a traffic nightmare and create more accidents. Also more responsibility should be taken on by drivers to be courteous instead of cutting eachother off creating traffic slowdown for everyone. P.S. Finish the Q Bridge and widen I95 to 4 lanes from NY to RI.
03/08/08 @ 12:09
Comment from: Dave [Visitor] Email
what ever happened to a democracy where the people vote for things that WE want, not one person? It seems that if the majority doesn't want to go with cameras regardless of the reasons, dont say as the governor well lets ignore what the public wants and do it anyway. by the way, there are license plate covers and sprays that over expose the cameras. people will find away around this stupid suggestion. Keep the cops and their jobs on our roads and not invested in technology. The next thing the governor will suggest is cutting back state troopers!!!
03/08/08 @ 15:01
Comment from: BC [Visitor]
*----
Let's ticket everybody! Let's make it a big police state where all of your actions are monitored! Let's make it so state workers and Pig Facist cops can get a pass to drive 100mph b/c the law doesn't need to apply to them! Yay Connecticut!!!
03/08/08 @ 16:22
Comment from: DD [Visitor]
More of our tax dollars hard at work...
03/09/08 @ 12:17
Comment from: Justin [Visitor] Email
****-
I think if they put in cameras above that stretch of highway in Old Lyme, 95 North, it would help with reckless speeders who have to swerve in and out of traffic so they can get to the Dunkin Donuts drive thru and sit on their asses some more. The people who lost their lives were 2 older people i believe from madison and milford or somewhere; for all of you who can't be with your aging parents 24/7 and want them to be around think about this next time you are so worried about people getting tickets going 75 in the 65 highway that was forever 55 and don't get so upset. I think speeders suck, i wouldn't want to own their leased automobiles after they have beat on them for 3 years so they can pass them onto say older parents of who can only afford used autos and then they can fend for their lives on the Open road if they have to venture more than 2 towns away. GO JODI RELL!
03/12/08 @ 19:37

Leave a comment


Your email address will not be revealed on this site.

Your URL will be displayed.
PoorExcellent
(Line breaks become <br />)
(Name, email & website)
(Allow users to contact you through a message form (your email will not be revealed.)
« Bill to ban plastic bags wins committee approvalClinton, in Mississippi, again raises possibility of ticket with Obama »