Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Alberta

Frown, You’re on Camera! The Case Against Photo Radar

Published

8 minute read

By John Robson

It’s been 25 years since my younger and more careless self got a speeding ticket. Or at least it had been until I suddenly got five in rapid succession across Ontario, all from photo radar, all for driving normally. I’m fighting them all as a gross breach of the social contract and the rule of law. And you should too.

Wait, you may cry. Don’t I deserve all those tickets? Doesn’t the law say that if the speed limit is 50 km per hour, you can’t go faster without risking punishment? Not quite. Rather, the law is what everyone knows it to be.

As philosophers going back to John Locke have explained across the centuries, the rule of law means “a standing rule to live by, common to every one of that society, and made by the legislative power erected in it.” And every driver knows the standing rule for Canada’s roads is that a human police officer won’t give you a ticket for going just slightly over the speed limit, unless you are weaving around, smoking a joint, texting or engaging in some other dangerous activity. We all get some leeway, at least in good weather.

Unfortunately, once governments began smelling an opportunity to grab some of the cash sitting pointlessly in our wallets, that time-honoured rule went out the lens with their ticket-dispensing Robocops.

Alberta was a surprising early adopter of photo radar, with its first device installed in 1987. More recently, it earned for itself the title of Canada’s most one-eyed-highwayman-ridden province, with 2,400 of the wretched things raking in $171 million in 2022. One single digital Dick-Turpin-meets-the-Sheriff-of-Nottingham in Edmonton fired off 52,558 tickets a year. Which so infuriated Albertans that the provincial transportation minister finally vowed to “kill the photo radar cash cow”. The result has been a promised 70 percent reduction in the devices.

Cash cow. There’s the rub. Promoters of speed cameras always preen about safety; one notice from rapacious Wellington County in Ontario, where five newly installed cameras promptly ticketed seven percent of all drivers, hollered “SLOW DOWN! SAVE A LIFE”. But they are lying.

Driving slightly over the limit on a four-lane street in broad daylight endangers nobody. Except now you, because you’re the cash cow. And whether we all spontaneously quote John Locke or not, virtually everyone senses in their gut that there’s something dishonest, unfair and even dangerous about this misuse of language and law enforcement resources.

We the public don’t object to enforcement of laws including traffic laws. If any normal person is pulled over by a live police officer in whose judgement our speed, or speed plus other less tangible things, creates public danger, we blush, fess up and pay up. We don’t even mind photo radar nabbing stunt-driving speed demons. But if you’d been sitting at that Edmonton intersection (Baseline Road and 17 th Street) with your own radar gun watching traffic, how many of those 52,558 vehicles do you suppose you’d have jumped up and gone “Whoa nelly, dude, slow down!” or “Don’t you know what a red light is?”

When I say everybody knows, I mean everybody. Do you think cops, traffic court Solons, or municipal councillors drive at or below the posted limit to work, shop or play? Of course not. Yet they sit there sanctimoniously plotting. In the case of Waterloo Region, in southwestern Ontario, the plan is to ramp up speed camera tickets from the current 70,000 to 875,000 tickets a year by 2029, which works out to more than one per ticket per driver annually. And not because their inhabitants are maniacal scofflaws, but because in the spirit of Bad King John these authorities have found a way to tax you without representation.

If you held a referendum asking whether posted speed limits should be ruthlessly enforced on everyone the result, I am confident, would be massively against. If you asked whether they should be raised significantly then enforced rigorously, it might be different. But the point is, we haven’t been asked. Governments just fell in love with the lucre they could extract and began putting them everywhere. And if you contest the tickets, the conviction
rate would have embarrassed Joseph Stalin.

Oh, and in Ontario they increase the fine if you presume to insist on your day in court. They say it’s not meant as a deterrent, but I say try lowering the fine for anyone who fights and loses and see if incentives matter. I say it’s not just financially dangerous, but socially and politically dangerous as well. As famed 19 th century writer Alexis de Tocqueville once warned, governments that succeed in smothering independence of spirit with petty regulations will eventually turn their populace into sheep, surly or just depressed. And self- government cannot be sustained by sheep.

On the bright side, nearly everywhere this nasty experiment has been tried, from Texas to Ontario under Bob Rae, the public managed to put a stop to it, at least temporarily.

So far my efforts to contest these tickets have been met with surprising contempt about my arguments regarding the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its promise of “fundamental justice”. As my quest to get a fair hearing in court continues, readers outside of Alberta should be warned that they too could soon be plundered for driving normally under the guise of public safety, by governments so chronically unable to manage their own finances
that they raid yours.

My advice: don’t let them do it to you. Fight it in the public arena, in the voting booth and yes, in the courts. They’ll convict you, of course. But if their administrative costs exceed the booty, they’ll eventually stop.

John Robson is an Ottawa-based journalist, historian and documentary-film maker. The longer, original version of this story first appeared at C2CJournal.ca

Before Post

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Alberta

Gondek’s exit as mayor marks a turning point for Calgary

Published on

This article supplied by Troy Media.

Troy MediaBy

The mayor’s controversial term is over, but a divided conservative base may struggle to take the city in a new direction

Calgary’s mayoral election went to a recount. Independent candidate Jeromy Farkas won with 91,112 votes (26.1 per cent). Communities First candidate Sonya Sharp was a very close second with 90,496 votes (26 per cent) and controversial incumbent mayor Jyoti Gondek finished third with 71,502 votes (20.5 per cent).

Gondek’s embarrassing tenure as mayor is finally over.

Gondek’s list of political and economic failures in just a single four-year term could easily fill a few book chapters—and most likely will at some point. She declared a climate emergency on her first day as Calgary’s mayor that virtually no one in the city asked for. She supported a four per cent tax increase during the COVID-19 pandemic, when many individuals and families were struggling to make ends meet. She snubbed the Dec. 2023 menorah lighting during Hanukkah because speakers were going to voice support for Israel a mere two months after the country was attacked by the bloodthirsty terrorist organization Hamas. The
Calgary Party even accused her last month of spending over $112,000 in taxpayers’ money for an “image makeover and brand redevelopment” that could have benefited her re-election campaign.

How did Gondek get elected mayor of Calgary with 176,344 votes in 2021, which is over 45 per cent of the electorate?

“Calgary may be a historically right-of-centre city,” I wrote in a recent National Post column, “but it’s experienced some unusual voting behaviour when it comes to mayoral elections. Its last three mayors, Dave Bronconnier, Naheed Nenshi and Gondek, have all been Liberal or left-leaning. There have also been an assortment of other Liberal mayors in recent decades like Al Duerr and, before he had a political epiphany, Ralph Klein.”

In fairness, many Canadians used to support the concept of balancing their votes in federal, provincial and municipal politics. I knew of some colleagues, friends and family members, including my father, who used to vote for the federal Liberals and Ontario PCs. There were a couple who supported the federal PCs and Ontario Liberals in several instances. In the case of one of my late
grandfathers, he gave a stray vote for Brian Mulroney’s federal PCs, the NDP and even its predecessor, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation.

That’s not the case any longer. The more typical voting pattern in modern Canada is one of ideological consistency. Conservatives vote for Conservative candidates, Liberals vote for Liberal candidates, and so forth. There are some rare exceptions in municipal politics, such as the late Toronto mayor Rob Ford’s populistconservative agenda winning over a very Liberal city in 2010. It doesn’t happen very often these days, however.

I’ve always been a proponent of ideological consistency. It’s a more logical way of voting instead of throwing away one vote (so to speak) for some perceived model of political balance. There will always be people who straddle the political fence and vote for different parties and candidates during an election. That’s their right in a democratic society, but it often creates a type of ideological inconsistency that doesn’t benefit voters, parties or the political process in general.

Calgary goes against the grain in municipal politics. The city’s political dynamics are very different today due to migration, immigration and the like. Support for fiscal and social conservatism may still exist in Alberta, but the urban-rural split has become more profound and meaningful than the historic left-right divide. This makes the task of winning Calgary in elections more difficult for today’s provincial and federal Conservatives, as well as right-leaning mayoral candidates.

That’s what we witnessed during the Oct. 20 municipal election. Some Calgary Conservatives believed that Farkas was a more progressive-oriented conservative or centrist with a less fiscally conservative plan and outlook for the city. They viewed Sharp, the leader of a right-leaning municipal party founded last December, as a small “c” conservative and much closer to their ideology. Conversely, some Calgary Conservatives felt that Farkas, and not Sharp, would be a better Conservative option for mayor because he seemed less ideological in his outlook.

When you put it all together, Conservatives in what used to be one of the most right-leaning cities in a historically right-leaning province couldn’t decide who was the best political option available to replace the left-wing incumbent mayor. Time will tell if they chose wisely.

Fortunately, the razor-thin vote split didn’t save Gondek’s political hide. Maybe ideological consistency will finally win the day in Calgary municipal politics once the recount has ended and the city’s next mayor has been certified.

Michael Taube is a political commentator, Troy Media syndicated columnist and former speechwriter for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He holds a master’s degree in comparative politics from the London School of Economics, lending academic rigour to his political insights.

Troy Media empowers Canadian community news outlets by providing independent, insightful analysis and commentary. Our mission is to support local media in helping Canadians stay informed and engaged by delivering reliable content that strengthens community connections and deepens understanding across the country

Continue Reading

Alberta

From Underdog to Top Broodmare

Published on

WATCH From Underdog to Top Broodmare (video)

Executive Producers Jeff Robillard (Horse Racing Alberta) and Mike Little (Shinelight Entertainment)

What began as an underdog story became a legacy of excellence. Crackers Hot Shot didn’t just race — she paved the way for future generations, and in doing so became one of the most influential producers the province has known.

The extraordinary journey of Crackers Hot Shot — once overlooked, now revered — stands as one of Alberta’s finest success stories in harness racing and breeding.

Born in humble circumstances and initially considered rough around the edges, Crackers Hot Shot overcame long odds to carve out a career that would forever impact the province’s racing industry. From a “wild, unhandled filly” to Alberta’s “Horse of the Year” in 2013, to producing foals who carry her spirit and fortitude into future generations.

Her influence ripples through Alberta’s racing and breeding landscape: from how young stock are prepared, to the aspirations of local breeders who now look to “the mare that did it” as proof that world-class talent can emerge from Alberta’s paddocks.

“Crackers Hot Shot, she had a tough start. She wasn’t much to look at when we first got her” — Rod Starkewski

“Crackers Hot Shot was left on her own – Carl Archibald heard us talking, he said ‘I’ll go get her – I live by there’. I think it took him 3 days to dig her out of the snow. She was completely wild – then we just started working on her. She really needed some humans to work with her – and get to know that people are not scary.” — Jackie Starkewski

“Crackers Hot Shot would be one of the top broodmares in Albeta percentage wise if nothing else. Her foals hit the track – they’re looking for the winners circle every time.” — Connie Kolthammer

Visit thehorses.com to learn more about Alberta’s Horse Racing industry.

Continue Reading

Trending

X