You've got to be kidding me. The fire was reported about 1:40 am and Marty Haggerty states that his kids were crying due to a perceived act of terrorism. One has to wonder what the actual total of kids in Baltimore County that have been run over in school zones in the last 50 years to warrant speed cameras in any school zone. I agree with Richard Hiteshew that this is nothing more than a waste of tax money and when Marty can prove to me that a kid gets run over every year in a school zone, maybe then it's time to install speed cameras.

Why does somebody need to die in order to put up a frickin speed camera?!?!! This is ridiculous. Brush up on your news buddy. A man was riding his motorcycle on South Rolling and he got in an accident due to speed and his head was completely decapitated. Also a huge car crash last year at midnight where a lady was thrown out of her car and died due to speeding of an individual. People have died and is about time that there are speed cameras. THINK BEFORE YOU SPEAK!!!!!!!!!

Its another way for Owemalley to get his numbers up. When he moves on to higher grown he needs a surplus not a deficit. 6 years ago Ehrlich left him a $1billion surplus.. Since then we $3billion down.. Thanks Owemalley.. Also these speed & red light camera's are not working properly. The camera at rossville and yellow brick road gives you less then 4 seconds from the time it turns yellow to either slam on brakes or go through it. People being ticketed daily including. Either risk a ticket or slam your brakes and let car behind you slam ya.. BTW.. Anyone need a copy of marriage license or death certificate and anything else the county can do for you? Prices have doubled.. $24.00 for "each copy".. must be a mighty fine copy machine..

Sure they'll get angry - because they suck at driving.

It doesn't raise money if you don't speed. Only an idiot gets busted going 13 over when you know a cameras there.

I hope whoever gets caught has to pay for another one.

The City of Albuquerque had both red light & speed cameras. In Albuquerque, all red light cameras are speed cameras.

The city asked the University of New Mexico in December 2009 to study the effects of, specifically, the red light cameras on crashes. That study found the number of crashes at intersections with cameras increased 3.5 percent, mostly due to a jump in rear-end collisions. When Albuquerque discovered it was losing about $100K a month on the cameras, the contract was renegotiated and, in time, dropped. Shortly after dropping the contract, the camera company, Redflex, billed Albuquerque $4.5 million.

It was also also pointed out that the cameras create a perverse incentive for cities to make sure the number of violators remains high, noting that if driver behavior actually changed, the number of violations would decrease over time and the cameras would produce less revenue. It was found that intersections with the cameras had shorter yellow light times increasing the chance of being cited and also of being rear ended if one slammed on the brakes. The study cited other, less expensive safety measures, such as extending yellow light lengths, that would be more effective with regard to red light cameras.

speeders kill people. Cameras are a desparate attempt to slow them down. You want to talk freedom. Many speeders have taken away prople's right ot live. in my development in reisterstown, many near misses have occurred, Particularly at the schools. Get real and have empathy for others.

@ dale green 9:08 pm on Friday, April 20, 2012

Stop overexaggerating. haggerty's kids were crying bc it was they were asleep and woken up bc there were firefighters/police making noise and flashing lights. The kids didnt say they were crying bc of terrorism.

This was vandalism not terrorism.

This is not terrorism. A crime, yes, but not terrorism. People need to get their definitions straight.

If this damage to the camera was done by kids who randomly selected the camera because it was there then no, it wasn't terrorism. But, if the camera was damaged in protest against the government for installing it, then this was absolutely an act of terrorism. It wasn't on the scale of Tim McVeigh, as I said, but it was from the same batch of angry brew his deed sprang from.

Terrorism? Yeah... right.... obviously someone who doesn't have a clue. This is an act of vandalism, nothing more or less.

Elaine Summerhill, you don't understand the meaning of the word terrorism.

Actually, there have been cases where non-offenders have been ticketed. My husband was one such case. Since my husband is an engineer by trade, he went to the intersection where he was ticketed for speeding, took measurements and then extrapolated the required information that proved that he was not speeding and that the camera issued a ticket erroneously. According to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, 28% of tickets that are issued are issued to the wrong person. Also, School Zone speed cameras are notorious for issuing tickets during hours when children are not present.

http://bancams.com/lynnwood-issued-bogus-tickets/

what's the 'loaded cost' of a cop these days? Appears that the current contract puts the cost of that camera around $12k per month, or $144k/year. Loaded salary costs can often be double actual take-home salary. And of course there's the overtime aspect, too. But this isn't a cost saving measure. Whether or not it's more or less cost-effective than other methods in satisfying the traffic calming goal is the real question. And yes, it would be nice to see an open bid for the next round of 'traffic calming' contracts.

oh, and relating to cost: I can only assume that the fire effectively destroyed the camera. I'd have a hard time believing they could recertify 'salvaged parts' for use, assuming it was as torched as the pictures show. So, a little math:

Damage claim due to camera replacement: $13,000
Monthly cost to rent and operate camera: $12,000

That just doesn't seem right.

Jean, I'm sorry if my comments above were misinterpreted. I don't agree with the torching of the camera (even though I find it amusing in an odd way - I know, that doesn't make sense, but...) I just thought that condeming the camera burning as terrrorism but not having any problem threatening to beat the perpetrator(s) up was quite a juxtaposition. He made the same type of statements to the WBAL reporter so I wasn't the only one who heard it.

Jean, that's a phrase I've heard too, more specifically from Councilman Tom Quirk. Here's the article I wrote last Friday, when the new location was added: http://catonsville.patch.com/articles/third-location-for-speed-camera-operational-on-south-rolling-road. It's also linked to in the story above.

SPEED BUMPS.. MUCH CHEAPER FOR US TAXPAYERS AND THEY SLOW YA DOWN..

We were told by the State Highway Administration that they can't put speed bumps on S. Rolling Rd. because it is a "winter emergency route" and requires regular snow plowing during the winter.

Ditto - I have one of the pictures as my desktop background at work!

"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety".

-Benjamin Franklin, shortly before February 17, 1775 as part of his notes for a proposition at the Pennsylvania Assembly

Well stated, Daffy! Speed cameras are nothing more than government tyranny. I applaud anyone who has the stones to destroy one. As for you whining parents out there; maybe you should teach your kids how to cross the street!

It's my understanding two high school kids were hit in the past few years by cars on Rolling Road by the high school.

Personally, I think the cameras work - most people slow down. I know I certainly do. It's a pain, but not much of one.

(But I would have loved to see that bonfire, all the same!)

Agreed! Reminds me of the old saying about how if you put a frog in a pot of cold water and slowly turn up the heat you can kill him, but if you drop him into a pot of boiling water he jumps right out. Government is slowly "turning up the heat" and the people are dying in the pot. How much more are we willing to give up? Hypothetically let's say in 10 years we could produce these speed cameras for $1.00....and they could afford to locate them every 50 feet....on every road ...in every town. Well, by the arguments I've seen here that would be great for our perceived "safety"....but at what cost to privacy? And don't give me the "if you don't speed then you would have nothing to worry about" argument. A certain group in Europe used a very similar logic in the middle of the last century with catastrophic results.

I am a senior attending Catonsville High School and I walk to school everyday and I have to cross South Rolling Road twice a day. If you believe this camera is mainly about money you are being ignorant and unintelligent. this is about safety. It does not take that much effort to drive the speed limit. I have a drivers license and it is possible to drive 30 mph. On my walks to school with my sister, I have been yelled at for crossing the road IN THE CROSS WALK. SLOW DOWN! I do not want to die on my way to school simply by wanting to cross the street. Fine, keep speeding, but I have to cross the street twice a day and if I die doing it how does that make it right to then put up a speed camera? Stop the situation before it happens. So therefore, I DO NOT agree with Daffy Duck or Dale Green and their comments. How about for once thinking about someone other than yourselves and while your speeding down South Rolling Road think of me and my sister. All I'm asking is for my community to keep me safe on my way to school. This is not that much to ask.

Hey Catonsville23, always remember to look both ways before crossing the street.

@M. Sullivan, it’s the drivers responsibility to STOP for a pedestrian in a cross walk. It is not the pedestrian's responsibility to wait for traffic to clear before crossing. So, traffic is flowing, pedestrian enters the crosswalk, traffic stops, pedestrian leaves the crosswalk, traffic continues. It’s really not that hard.

I don't know about you, Nick Z. but I wait until the traffic stops before I step into the street. Just because it's the law, doesn't mean I will just nonchalantly start crossing the street and assume the cars will stop. That kind of assumption can get you killed.

@M. Sullivan: I also wait for a break in traffic, usually out of courtesy for motorists, in addition to my own safety.

catonsville23,

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I agree everyone should slow down so the roads are safe. Cameras do not make the road safe, they only make record of a violation. There are ways to make the roads safer for both the pedestrian and the motorist without installing cameras. I want you to be able to cross Rolling road on any road safe for pedestrians as many times a day as you would want.

Speed humps are effective in slowing traffic 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. Cross walks and traffic lights with pedestrian lights are a good measure to improve road safety. The pedestrian must also practice safe procedures as well.

I don't speed and do not approve of speed scameras.

Actually Daffy, last year a car was going 30+ mph over the speed limit on S. Rolling Rd and launched itself over the ditch, thru a stone pillar and fence into the front yard of a home where multiple children live and would normally have been outside in that yard at the time of the incident, but by the grace of God were not on that morning. If they had been out in the yard that morning and this car landed on them, would you then support efforts to enforce the existing posted speed limit on S. Rolling Rd?

Many of us residents of S. Rolling attended meeting with the State Highway Administration officials for 2 years discussing all the ways that we could make our road safer for everyone. All of the suggestions that many of you have listed were discussed and we were told that none of them could be implemented on our street for various reasons. SHA said NO to speed bumps/humps because S. Rolling is the "winter emergency route" and can not be plowed effectively if they install speed humps. SHA said NO to a traffic light because the volume of traffic has not yet reached the criteria required to install a traffic light. SHA said NO to a pedestrian crossing light again because we do not meet the criteria at this time. SHA said they would not even put standard signs in the middle of the crosswalk to make it more visible to pedestrians, because it is too costly to continually replace them when they get destroyed by motorists driving over them. Got any other ideas that have not been shot down by the SHA? I would love to hear them.

I am an adult who is perfectly capable of crossing the street safely, however, because motorists choose to ignore the law and do not stop for pedestrians who are waiting patiently to cross the road, it can take up to ten minutes before traffic clears enough to safely attempt a crossing. The predominant attitude of drivers on S. Rolling seems to be "I"m driving a car and you're walking, so I don't have to stop, cause I'm bigger and stronger than you, so you have to stop for me, but I don't have to stop for you." Maybe it's just me, but that isn't the example I want to set for my kids. Seems suspiciously like the attitude of a bully.

Speed humps are just as effective in slowing down the traffic as cameras. They are cheaper to install, last longer and are not some artificial revenue generator. I guess the speed bump lobbyists haven't been lining the pockets of our local legislators as well as the camera companies!

So I suppose the eldery "forget" how to cross the street, then? If that is the case, I suppose we should all adjust our strategies, since more senior housing is coming to South Rolling Road in the next year. Thanks for offering more reasons for us to utililize all necessary means of safety.
But just an FYI - I don't want any kid to be simply "statistically safe", so I will continue to fight for safety on our roads in any situation.

M Sullivan, speed humps cost the county money they don't make the county any money. The neighbors on my street petitioned the county for speed humps but we were told we couldn't have them because not enough people were travelling fast enough to meet the guidelines. There are 18 children living or playing on our street and I've never counted the number of dogs and cats who would be in danger if they manage to escape their home or yard. If the county were truly worried about the safety of the children they would have no problem with giving us speed humps. No government, county state or federal, really cares about the people who live there.

If they put in legitimate sized speed humps, you'd have the same lot of you QQing about suspension damage, and blaming the state for that.

Just stop already. I know better.

i know how to cross the street we use the CROSS WALK

The SHA said NO to speed bumps because S. Rolling is a "winter emergency route" and it impedes their ability to plow the road in the winter.

I am an adult who is perfectly capable of crossing the street safely, however, because motorists choose to ignore the law and do not stop for pedestrians who are waiting patiently to cross the road, it can take up to ten minutes before traffic clears enough to safely attempt a crossing. The predominant attitude of drivers on S. Rolling seems to be "I"m driving a car and you're walking, so I don't have to stop, cause I'm bigger and stronger than you, so you have to stop for me, but I don't have to stop for you." Maybe it's just me, but that isn't the example I want to set for my kids. Sounds like the attitude of a bully.

Maureen,
I agree that it is a sad day to see such a lack of respect shown to each other in this community. We have been begging for ANY and all safety measures the county & State Highway Administration can give us to make our street a safer place for everyone. Just so you and everyone else know, our efforts to get the camera have not been negated. The company who supplies and maintains the cameras has them insurance, so the camera was replaced within days. Also noteworthy, during the few days after the first camera was destroyed, there was a three car accident right in front of the camera site that required one driver to be taken to the hospital by ambulance. The accident investigators estimated her speed at over 50 mph just before she struck the car in front of her.

Whether or not you agree with the cameras, setting one on fire is a felony that carries a sentence of up to 10 years in prison. I don't really think anyone who would engage in such a violent display of behavior is anyone that I would call a genius. There are plenty of other less violent and more safe ways to protest government intervention into our lives.

paul.. that depends on who you hire? The cost of the signs and the immigrants who work cheap?

State Highway Administration said NO to this solution.

Actually, the contract was renegotiated. The tickets are only $40 and the money collected is split 50/50 between the company and the county. Also, the company is the one who incurs all the cost of issuing, mailing, & collecting the $$ for these tickets.

If it slows down the idiots who think they can drive any way they want, I say put them every 25 feet.
Sane people drive the speed limit because studies show the set limit is the safest for any particular location.
People crossing the street, people on bikes, runners, people pulling out from driveways and stop signs, etc. should be able to expect other cars on the road to respect these limits.
If you don't think the speed limit that is in effect is proper, then fight it through the proper channels. You don't have the right to drive whatever speed you want just because you think the speed limit is too low!
Speeding is breaking the law. Try explaining otherwise to your kids.

There actually is a private school there with Early Childhood education and child care through elementary school.

"Do you really think that a camera is going to make a dangerous driver slow down?"
Yes - case and point: the beltway, people used to go through construction zones at the normal ~70mph (which is dangerous). Now they go through at 55-60 (less dangerous). So a camera has made dangerous drivers slow down, even when the camera isn't there.

Driving is a PRIVILEGE, not a guaranteed right. All of the people who you listed above as examples of unsafe drivers should not be allowed to have the privilege of a drivers license. Jennifer, I think you are onto something. Instead of trying to find ways to influence driver behavior to be safer, our efforts should be focused on having driving privileges revoked from those who can not drive safely.

Travel in your personal property requires no permission from the government. If you consider the way that you travel a PRIVILEGE granted by the government then that's your business. As a free human being I exercise my RIGHT to travel freely every day.. and without incident. I will never bow to the ruler because he tells me I have to.
Sheeple have failed our Country miserably....it's why things are not going very well for the good ol USA these days.

Resident, I guess you also think that the Federal Reserve Bank is a part of our government as well..... such a dumbed down public....Education MUST be improved for such important matters of our Country.

Mr. Harmon,
First of all, there are several people on here with the same user name "Resident" so do not assume that all these comments are coming from the same person. Secondly, you are correct. Travel in your own person property does not require permission from the government, IF you are traveling on private property. If you choose to drive on public roadways, then yes, you do have to have the "permission" of the government in the form of a valid drivers license to use public roadways. And if you choose to violate the laws and rules which are a condition of using said public roadways, then the government has the legal justification to revoke your drivers license. This has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not you can utilize your own private property. It pertains to WHERE you can utilize your private property. Also, this is a forum for people to share their opinions. Why do you feel the need to be insulting to others for exercising their freedom of speech, regardless of their level of education.

Too many Residents are making comments that are just not true...most likely due to the limited dumb down, government approved education that they were fed. Some refer to this as growing up being brain washed in the public education system.
When I read a comment that I know is not correct I freely respond with my opinion.
I also realize that when exercising this right using my REAL name that I will be subject to criticism as well....goes with the turf...get over it or use your real name when stepping up to the plate...too many dumbed down Residents using the same fake name in my opinion. Speed trap camera's have built in failure and inaccuracy. Couple that with the fact that they invade privacy, and are expensive and you have a dumb solution to a very serious problem. The arguments FOR poorly made speed trap camera's are lame at best.

A dumb non-solution...

Or given a medal of Freedom.

No but they will be prosecuted for malicious destruction of property and possibly arson. The first charge is a felony and carries a sentence of up to 10 years in prison. If whoever it is gets caught, I wonder if they will still think it was worth it.

Good point!

I have a clean driving record. The State has never charged me with a speed violation.

JTF, I'm not talking about a clean driving record. Speeding is one thing, getting caught is another. I do 60 on the Beltway (50-55 in the work zones with cameras) and have a clean record as well. I'm commenting on the people here who keep talking about doing the speed limit, but who I doubt driver at 55 or under on the Beltway since I RARELY pass anyone when I'm going 60.

While the speed camera will not generate a violation notice, a Police Officer can issue a citation for going over the posted speed in a school zone. An Officer issued citation comes with a fine double for a non-school zone and points on your drivers license. An Officer can issue the ticket for 1 MPH over the posted speed.

Speed Humps will slow traffic down, cost less to install and maintain and are effecting at slowing traffic 24 - 7.

Sean,

This is not terrorism, it was an act of vandalism. There was not threat of intimidation in this act. The only thing damaged by the vandal was the camera device. No one was injured by this act of vandalism.

JTF, no one has to be injured in an act of terrorism in order for it to be an act of terrorism. And, if this camera was damaged as a protest against speed cameras, than it would qualify as an act of terrorism.

JTF, this was actually felony malicious destruction of property (slightly more egregious than vandalism). Also, the fire which was started at the speed camera could have easily spread to surrounding trees and ultimately houses if this had not been reported right away so that the fire department could respond and control it in time.

Resident,

I will call it an act of vandalism until someone is convicted of the crime. If a suspect is found and convicted of Felony Malicious Destruction of property, than I will agree that is is more than vandalism in the scope of crimes. The state must prove the case. So far there is only a report of an alleged crime.

Wow Sean...those are far steps you had jumped to!!! The fact that you have gone to that extreme and are so very sure about an extreme comparison is troubling, indeed.

Lorna, I would be open to this act of violence being attributed to kids mischief, but this isn't the first time this has happened. So, either it is a premediated act of terror in protest against the government or it is kids destroying public property. Either way, that is the troubling aspect to this story, not my pointing it out.

Sean,

You fail to understand. Vandalism is a crime, it is not terrorism or violence. It was a criminal act, It simply is neither violence or terrorism.

JTF, I don't see how you can say blowing up a camera is not an act of violence. Even if it were just kids pulling a prank, it was still an act of violence.

And a nice big sign would have about as much impact as the big signs that say "Please Don't Litter" and "Do Not Cross The Tracks".

And if someone doesn't like your signs do they have the right to burn them down?

Make the signs heart shaped...great idea lorna!

Sean, this is something both you and I can agree on. Remember when you opened your email and could keep track of the latest comments. As you said, it's now a guessing game.

Buzz, yes, we agree.

I agree as well.....also when Pending Approval purple is turned on the socialist tend to comment more happily..

Bob the interesting aspect to this whole agenda, no matter what steps are take by law enforcement or the government to deal with this issue, there are those who have no respect for anything much less the law. To them it's an intrusion into their rights to break the law.

Amdactivist, I'm totally shocked that O'Malley was stumped! And I am appalled that the crowd would laugh at someone who is drawing a road map to the White House with crayons. Maybe he was reading it upside down. Now that would not surprise me, nor would the laughter.

If this act of vandalism is being called terrorism ---what the hell was 9/11??? True terrorist acts perpetrated on our soil and all over the world can in no way be compared for the love of God!!! Let us just keep it all in perspective, shall we?

Reader, there are the D's, the R's, the I's, the left and the right. And in the middle of it all is a line. When you cross that line, no matter what your letter or side is, it's wrong.

Lorna, 9-11 was an act of terrorism, so was Tim McVeigh blowing up the federal building. This incident, if it was done as political protest, was also an act of terrorism. Nobody was killed in this incident, thank God, but that doesn't make it any less an act of terrorism. It just means it is not a murder case also.

Reader, that all sounds very good but it still doesn't excuse this crime.

There are too many lines....too many lines lead to too many tangles..it's inevitable.
Why didn't the great enforcer at the top have fireproof camera's installed? Didn't know metal burned so easily...

Zoobie, a person has every right to take their accusor to court. They just don't have the right to damage public property in protest.

zoobie.. In Md and many other places "we the people" don't count for crap.. The corruptions of our politicians is controlling their pockets.. I don't object to speeding cameras but this state is now 4th highest taxed state in 2011. I'm sure 2012 will be worse.. Omalley is running for high ground.. 2016 presidential ideas.. He needs to show a surplus when he leaves and not a deficit.. He will get it one way or another.. yet has no problems feeding the scams of his new americans with our tax $$$.. I would be putting signs on those camera's saying OMALLEY HAS DESTROYED OUR STATE. 6 years ago Ehrlich left with a $1billion surplus.. Now we have a $2billion deficit Thanks to omalley's new americans and the spending habits of our politicians with our $$..

JTF, this "Patriot" broke laws that were passed by representatives elected by a majority vote. I don't see how you can see this person as a hero. I would call the person an anarchist at best and a terrorist by any other name.

I don't like the hunting laws in this state. Do I have the right to go torch all those deer stands the hunters erect on public property?

In this instance, Patriot = Vandal. Get over yourself.

The ACLU only defends the constitution when they choose. I will not support the ACLU.

Paul your whacky.. if you've ever been to annapolis hearings and heard the racist pigs speak out against our citizens then you might not think they are fair.. They have a great title that sways people like you into their folds of dead skin.. They have their own set of rules and its not the constitution that they often quote..

JTF, when else should the ACLU defend the Constitution? When you choose? When the guy behind the burned up speed camera chooses?

Jackie, you promised to leave me alone.

And yet there was another car accident on S Rolling Rd this morning - air bag deployed and front end smashed to pieces - right at the spot where the speed camera should be.

Lorna, blowing up a speed camera in protest is a little more serious than graffiti. But, having said that, I would argue that some graffiti could be a form of terrorism, depending on what the message said.

I can bet that high school kids will slow down when their parents take the car away after getting 5 tickets in a week.

Or more voters. Or a more popular politician. If your statement is stupid voters, then move somewhere without a democracy, because this is how a democracy works: the popular candidate wins.

Stupid voters put K.K., Martin O'Malley, and Obomber in office. Yes the Stupid voters are the ones responsible.

If you voted for Kamenetz, O'Malley or Obama you are Stew Pid!

JTF, I don't know you (that initial stuff vs real name), you may or may not know me (real name), but when it comes to McCain/Palin vs. Obama (that is his name)/Biden I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, just simply ignorant not stupid. Name calling is silly isn't it?

Paul,

No, it is a political statement how I address the thing in the White House.

JTF, you made your point and mine too.

Paul,

You are wrong, the elected get the respect they earn. Most of them deserve none. It has been a very long time since there were elected officials who I disagreed with also earned my respect.

There are some who I agree with and have failed to earn respect as well.

Chris, where did you get that definition of the meaning of terrorism? So the plane that crashed into the Pentagon on 9-11 wasn't an act of terrorism. That was clearly a military target.

If it wasn't a state road, we'd have speed bumps and other means of safety improvements already. If you research the area, you will see that a majority of the roads that connect to S Rolling have these measures in place. That being said, I don't see where anyone called it an innocent little road. It is, however, mostly a one-lane road in each direction.
This issue does not deal with traffic and congestion, but people's speed. Widening the road and providing turn lanes serve the speeders and no one else, which is why those "solutons" were not supported by the community.
The proper perspective is that this is a residential community, regardless of the ownership of the road.

Seriously Bart, these people just don't get it.

People don't want to take responsiblity, it's always someone else's fault. How dare they take 50 dollars from me for going 45 in a 30 by camera?

Agreed. In my neigborhood they are even nicer to the speeders by removing them from school zones on non school days (weekends/holidays). I fail to see people's problem for getting a ticket for breaking the law.

Bart, aren't you mixing your metaphors? You accuse "law and Order wingnuts" of believing they are exempt from the laws against speeding? Generally speaking, "law and order wingnuts" are in favor of rigidly enforcing the laws, right? Although I agree that "wingnut" is a catchy term and kinda fun to fling at your adversaries.

Inalienable, [unalienable,] or natural Rights!
Natural rights are those rights such as Life(from conception), Liberty and the pursuit of happiness eg. Freedom of Religion, Speech, Learning, Free Travel,Self Defense, etc.
Hence laws and statutes which violate NATURAL RIGHTS, though they have the color of law, are not law but impostors! The U.S. Constitution was written to protect these NATURAL RIGHTS from being tampered with by legislators. * Further, our forefathers also wisely knew that the U.S. Constitution would be utterly worthless to restrain government legislators unless it was clearly understood that the people had the right to compel the government to keep within the Constitutional limits.
The right to travel freely without interference by the government is clearly in violation here.
The requirements for licensing and mandatory insurance purchase relating to travel in your personal property also violate your NATURAL RIGHTS.
I don't expect many that tend to participate in these kinds of blogs to fully understand this because of the DUMBED DOWN public education processes that most have been subjected to.
Laws that in any way impede your ability to Travel Freely are non laws.
That is what the Constitution clearly states with regard to travel.

@Buck -
"Inalienable, [unalienable,] or natural Rights!" – This is not in the constitution. The Constitution is the governing document of our country, not the Declaration of Independence. The Constitution was an agreement between the states for a stronger federal government after the previous confederation of states failed. So, stop using the DoI as the foundation for arguments please.

"right to travel freely without interference by the government" - "In United States v. Wheeler, 254 U.S. 281 (1920), the Supreme Court reiterated its position that the Constitution did not grant the federal government the power to protect freedom of movement." (admittedly I had to look this up, this is from David Bogen's book on the constitution, via wikipedia).

"because of the DUMBED DOWN public education processes" - So you are for spending more money on public education?

Well see Buck, you and I agree in the sense of teaching your children how to take proper safety measures. You also have to teach your children to look out for bad drivers, because this state is full of them.

We shouldn't HAVE to depend on the State to force safety on our families. Maybe if the average person in this thread (who represents countless other bad drivers in Maryland) drived more like normal, well adjusted and considerate human beings, not only would the state not NEED to legislate poor driving but the state 'coffers' would be empty from speed cameras.

Speed cameras are NOT an overreach. If the Supreme Court wants to say they are, then they will be Unconstitutional.
Again, speed cameras only generate rage from bad drivers. if people want them gone, they need to learn to drive and make them un-needed.

I'd love to see cameras in front of shopping centers and strip malls too. Start fining people for parking in fire lanes (idling or not) 50 bucks and teach these inconsiderate traffic congestors that the parking lot is for use by them too, they aren't VIP's.

The supreme court can never overide the highest rule of the land...The Constitution.
I do respect the fact that you do not understand this though... most do not, or our Country would not at this point be so screwed by big over reaching government at every level. The sheeple will always play by the government rules because of what they don't know ...out of what amounts to fear of being handled by government in one illegal fashion of another.

Entrapment? - According to every definition I can find entrapment is "The act of government agents or officials that induces a person to commit a crime he or she is not previously disposed to commit."

I suspect that many people would go faster than the designed speed for the road even if there weren't a speed limit there. So having a speed limit (or crossing law) to protect pedestrians and other motorists is not entrapment.

Regarding the safety of your family at crosswalks: do you teach your children to protect the safety of other people's family's by stopping for others at crosswalks?

Entrapment = speed TRAPS. Words are manipulated in attempt to confuse the truth.
If you believe that speed camera's are not revenue seeking traps I would suggest that you keep grazing in the field of mildly educated sheeple that have allowed these massive intrusions.

In this day and age I'd rather be a sheep, rather than the wild wolf that gets persecuted and hunted down for being a wolf. From the field of sheep, life isn't so bad.

A speed trap catches people breaking a law: a law they would break if the trap wasn't there. So a speed trap is not, by its nature, entrapment.

You can't make that last statement make sense Nick G .
I am simply a living, breathing human being that seeks happiness by living freely and abiding by the highest law of the land first. Laws that oppose this way of life are non laws...period. I don't believe that I would be hunted down for standing for the truth...if that would happen...I would defend my rights with vigor and without intimidation.
Be sure to stay within the boundaries that your ruler demands..it is your right as well.

Maybe I can clarify with an example.

The speed limit is 55, which is a law set by the government with the assent of the people, or it would be revoked.
A person goes 70 down the road. They break the law.
The police put up a camera to catch them.
A person goes 70 down the road. They get their picture taken, and are fined.

They broke the law no matter if the camera was their or not. They were not convinced to break the law by the camera, so there is no entrapment.

I respect your right to live freely and pursue happiness to your hearts content, as long as it doesn't impede on another to do the same. If the residents of this neighborhood have a justifiable fear for their and their children's safety, you are limiting THEIR rights.

They make good targets for paintball guns !

Or...your anti-government tracking program deleted your login cookie?

I'm not anti government at all....I insist on good government that functions first by the oath to uphold the Constitution.
Regarding spending more money for education, no way. I believe that the government approved "dumb down" curriculum needs some serious reform so that students today might have the opportunity to fully understand the highest law of the land. Same budget....improved curriculum.

You miss took my comment. I was suggesting you were worried about the government tracking your online activity ("is Patch now controlled by the government") and that you had installed a program to prevent this tracking. I in no way consider you anti-government, just for a different government that what our country has had for the last 100+ years.

Hi Buck, it could be something with your browser, but even as the editor I now have to sign in multiple times a day when I go away from the site for an hour or so. This changed a few weeks ago with an update we did on the site. No government control here...just constant changes and tweaks to the site.

I was mostly being literal with the wolf and the sheep. I disagree with hunting down wolfs for being wolfs in the Sierra Nevada and Rocky mountains.

As far as the analogies towards the US government~Nazis & the majority US population~Jews~Sheep, I am left with a distaste in my mouth. I believe that the US constitution and democratic system provide sufficient protections to prevent anything similar from happening in the US.

I respect the choice that you have made Nick, If this is your pursuit of happiness, and you are happy with the way things have been going, that's great! Your mind should be at ease... no worries.
However, I see our rights and freedoms being meticulously eroded by out of control wannabe law maker public servant leaders...at every level.
Something as simple as trapping people that are seeking to travel freely with camera's that have proven failure built into them is a big step in the wrong direction in my opinion.
I like the idea that Lorna shared earlier in this blog about getting the community involved with signage, carefully developed to put travelers on notice that pedestrians travel regularly through certain area's that experience potentially dangerous conditions.
I don't believe that anyone wants to be charged with manslaughter because of poor travel decisions.

@Buck - By your use of "meticulously" I will draw the conclusion that you believe this is done intentionally and maliciously. This is why I am involved in this conversation, and why my mind is not "at ease". I believe that our representatives and public servants are doing their best to accomplish what we "hired" them to do: representing their voters, and serving the public.
The public wanted safer roads, and so they made speed limits. The criminals ignored the speed limits, so they installed cameras. As I said up higher ^^^ I respect your right to travel freely, as long as it doesn't impede the rights of others to do the same.

I love it and agree. Bring on the speed bumps and raised sidewalks. Lets just hope no one sues the county for damages.

Plus, they are harder to burn.

If they put in speed bumps, we'd have people crying about their suspensions getting damaged. People will bitch about anything that inconveniences them and their poor driving habits.
Not to mention the fact they wear down over time.

I'd be open to the suggestion in place of cameras, but it's not without its own problems.

Doesn't sound too scary to me. People actually claim things they don't have proof for? Sounds stupid, inviting a audit.

Answer is yes. Risk vs reward.

Well, I'll keep following the law, and facing the consequences when I don't. You can keep complaining that the enforcement is unfair.

As far as US vs. Guest, the decision provided that there is a right to travel, but that to bring suit against that right, "A specific intent to interfere with the federal right must be proved, and at a trial the defendants are entitled to a jury instruction phrased in those terms." So the speed cameras do no have a specific intent to interfere with your right to move between states, thus do not impede your federal rights.

These laws that you are referring to pertain to commercial travel Nick...

@Buck - Yup, the constitution grants the federal government to regulate interstate commerce. The constitution does not mention an individual right to travel.

Actually the constitution doesn't say it. There constitution says that the federal government has the right to regulate interstate commerce. Although the Articles of Confederation provided that "the people of each State shall have free ingress and regress to and from any other State," that right finds no explicit mention in the Constitution.

Interstate commerce of commercial travel..

@Buck - you are correct. The constitution talks about interstate commerce, not rights of individuals to travel.

Nick Z.,

The tenth amendment states

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

The constitution does not prohibit the people from traveling, so that right is granted in the 10th.

But "the people" people don't have a right to elect representatives who vote for erecting speed cameras according to the "patriots". Something is wrong with that train of thought.

@JTF - Your individual right to travel is restricted by the state's (and county's) duty to regulate behavior to protect others and maintain order. See below:

Constitution: The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.

STATE Legislature on April 11, 1874: "CHAPTER 374: AN ACT for the better protection of persons and property in Baltimore county. SECTION 1. Be it enacted by the General Assembly of Maryland, That the County Commissioners of Baltimore county, be and they are hereby authorized and required to appoint such number of policemen as they may deem necessary, for the better protection of persons and property in Baltimore county."

Later the State Gave the following power to the Counties: "A speed monitoring system may not be used in a local jurisdiction under this section unless its use is authorized by the governing body of the local jurisdiction by local law enacted after reasonable notice and a public hearing."

The County Issued this Law: "IN ACCORDANCE WITH § 21-809 OF THE TRANSPORTATION ARTICLE OF THE ANNOTATED CODE OF MARYLAND, THE COUNTY MAY USE AND ENFORCE CITATIONS ISSUED FROM SPEED MONITORING SYSTEMS WITHIN THE COUNTY."

So If your arguement is that the consititution didn't create the power to limit this right, you are correct. Your state and county government did.

Gentlemen, I find it actually humorous to read arguments about a constitution that was written when the only cameras that existed were people's eyes and they didn't have speed limits, just horse drawn carriages. Imagine the arguments another 250 years from now, trying to apply a 500 year old constitution to problems 250 years from now. Simply absurd and presumes the planet still exists.

What did the framer's intend, they had no idea what was coming, they (men only) wrote only for what had happened in the past.

Paul Amirault,

You are correct, the Constitution was written many years ago, and the men who wrote it provided a method to change the document. The Constitution is the law and foundation for our government.

In 500 years things will be very different however the basic concept of Freedom of the people should never be infringed.

Paul, The Constitution of the United States remains the highest law of the land today.
The fact that you and others are not fully educated as to the ongoing protections provided by this document is a result of government controlled, dumb down public education. It's because of what you don't know that you make general statements about it's age. The framers put developed the Constitution as a means to keep the government in check at every level and it still functions as such. The meaning or importance can only be changed to suit the times by an amendment that has been ratified by the states. Here's one example of what happens when tyrant leadership abuses the Constitutional law....The 16th amendment that is perceived to give the government authority to take income from citizens has NEVER been fully ratified. The citizens have been deceived into believing that they MUST pay but in reality the income tax is a voluntary program at best.
Education trumps general statements by those that just haven't made the effort to seek the truth.
The right to travel freely without interference from the government remains in force today...fact. You have to live freely to recognize the importance of this natural right that is protected by the Constitution.

Ah Buck, the Constitution was written by white, racist, slave owning, mysogynists, please don't attempt to lecture me as I find it offensive, I am neither stupid nor ignorant. It is simply an old document written by old white men who had no idea what the future would bring. They had some valid ideas which continue today, but which now get contorted by lawyers and Supreme Court justices.

Buck, the 16th amendmenr ratification was completed on February 3, 1913. I keep a copy of the Constitution and notes with me.

Not true Paul...the 16th amendment to the constitution was never fully ratified. The information that you share is what the government wants people that will not make the effort to accurately educate themselves to believe...I am not going to waste my time trying to educate a dumbed down narrow minded human being that spouts baloney without accuracy. You are wrong once again Paul.. I would suggest that you do the research before making such odd statements.
I'm still waiting to discuss the plastic shack residential development projects that you seem to have made a living with. You can trash the authors of the Constitution, but you are one of the GREED driven men of today that have screwed homebuyers with sub standard housing projects. You have no understanding, other than that which has lined your pockets.

Buck, many tax protesters (dummies) such as yourself have tried this same logic many times before, it is not new. Try not paying your taxes and making your nutty claim.

You'll pay.

Buck, anytime you wish to discuss plastic shack housing I'll be glad to indulge. Apparently another subject you know very little about, not surprising.

Paul, that was a very vague response,,,come on.. you can do better than that.
I have always paid every legal tax that is required of me.. I will never pay a tax that can not be proven legal, it's because of what I know... nothing what so ever to do with the general term "tax protester' that you use. I could care less if citizens want to pay a voluntary tax, the government deceptively promotes that. The 16th Amendment to the Constitution was NEVER fully ratified by the states.. therefore it is a non-law..always has been.
You can not provide valid evidence to back your claim that it was...I could teach you but I don't believe that you would be an astute student worthy of the knowledge that I have to share...and certainly not on this very long blog.
Regarding the new home market over the last 20plus years...I am an expert.....
The vast majority of new homes have been built to the lowest quality allowed by law, (minimum code requirement).. hence, home purchasers were (and still are) buying new homes built to minimum standards at best and paying TOP dollar based on location.... one of the largest and most deceptive scams ever bestowed upon the people. Guys like you....that have made the claim of being in the 1% took advantage of this greed driven process that is being paid for dearly by the consumer today.
You should hang your head in shame , rather than tout the 1% crap. I'm on to you game big time Paul and you just don't like it....

Buck, let's start with every court case attempting to prove the invalidity of the 16th Amendment has been dismissed. Every one. You are flat wrong. Quote the one case, just one, that has held up on appeal and is the law of the land.

Regarding homebuilding, your show your ignorance there too. Obviously minimum standards have to be set by almost every regulated industry. What you fail to recognize or accept, is that the minimum standard has been continually raised. Today's minimum standards far exceeds those of 20 years ago. So much for your expertise there.

Regarding the 1%, it is called capitalism. You prefer socialism I guess?

Paul, Corrupt courts~judges have in fact played a huge role in the trampling of the Constitution.... Much like they, and code enforcement and shoddy developers, crooked banker lenders....all working in unison to collectively screw the average citizen out of every possible dollar possible, by offering low grade products at highest possible dollar thru deception.
This is the kind of arena that you have doddled in Paul.

You've said this a couple times but it hasn't caught on. Maybe you should go to a Board of Education meeting and suggest it. You can say how your education in the county was so watered down, and how people would be better taught by reading blogs online.

Nick Z., I would disagree with you 100%, there is very little "learning" going on in an atmosphere of anonymity and hiding behind screen names as very few are willing to disclose who they are. Exposure to other ideas and concepts, yes, learning, not necessarily.

@Paul - I completely agree with you. I was mearly suggesting that buck should try and suggest his idea to the Board of Ed and see how it went over.

There is also a problem with "smart meters" being installed on your home to monitor many things about your private electric usage.... the illusion continues because sheeple will abide by anything that the ruler puts before them.

There is something strange about these teachers telling our children that the earth is round and that the Sun is at the center of our solar system. What's up with that?

We know because the fire investigators found evidence of an accelerant which they believe is likely gasoline. Also one neighbor witnessed a car parked next to the speed camera shortly after the fire started, then the car quickly drove away.

I'm sure that there will be a written report available at some point, but the investigator on the scene shared this information verbally with several neighbors who were present.

There is not enough evidence here to convince me, or any reasonable person, that any crime has been committed. Someone named "Resident" says that "an investigator" shared critical information with "several neighbors." Do any of these sources you are quoting have actual names? Until convincing evidence is presented, everyone should just calm down. I still say an electrical problem inside the locked stainless steel cabinet is a more likely cause of this fire.

It was reported on the major local networks. Also on video at WBAL's website -video interview of Ms. Armacost, spokesperson for the County Police Department. I don't know if they checked her credentials prior to the interview, but I understand she is pretty well known...
Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but if you are looking for facts, I would suggest doing your own due diligence rather than relying on comments typed into a single internet forum.

Not meaning to belabor the point, but thanks for pointing to some other sources. I checked them all out, although only found a print version (not video) of Armacost's comments. She appears to have issued that statement about it being a "malicious burning" (not arson) the day after the fire. I see quite a few amateur opinions, and a couple of real names, so that is a step forward, but then again you would hardly expect the service rep for the company that supplies the cameras to blame his company's equipment. Nor does the neighbor (who claims this was "terrorism" and estimates the fire was burning for half an hour before the fire department arrived) or a radio reporter who thought he smelled gas count as reliable evidence that the fire was intentionally set. I have no idea how the fire started. My only point is it doesn't appear that there is any solid reason yet to conclude that it was - or wasn't- set intentionally.Enough said on the subject until something credible is reported.

Lorna, Pretty little heart shaped signs would make drivers aware of area's that get heavy foot traffic....couple that with a few humps in the road and most of the speeding problem would calm down nicely. No burden to the budget with immediate results.
I like the way you think honey child..

O yea, that's right....the "honey child " police could be lurking...I applied for a permit to use that sweet little term of endearment though....sweet dreams..

I had to sign in 2 times last evening as well Lorna...also the email notification that Patch uses has been "improved"?? Every notification from every comment on any blog just says.." noreply new comment", that's it !!
I have asked Westminsrer Patch, Reisterstown Patch, Towson Patch and now Catonsville Patch about this annoying new addition to the forum...no one seems to know why....It is not my browser, had the Geeks check it out...
Great day to you!

This site is run by AOL, and as such, is trash. If there were a better option then this for local news, I'd go to it.

The community is what makes it. Like facebook, another trash social media data gathering item. If I didn't have a kid, I wouldn't be on it at all.

The 'approval pending' is a jedi mind trick. It only sets that up for people who post and don't login. If you post, then login, then hit f5, you'll see your post is no longer 'pending approval'.

Just more terrible code and advertising from AOL. it's also why you'll continue to see this website progressively whored out over time. It's starting with the Walgreen's ad on every page, although it's sadly fitting for this community.

See Penny's reply to Buck above:

Penny Riordan
5:48 pm on Monday, April 23, 2012
"Hi Buck, it could be something with your browser, but even as the editor I now have to sign in multiple times a day when I go away from the site for an hour or so. This changed a few weeks ago with an update we did on the site. No government control here...just constant changes and tweaks to the site."

What happened? Get caught?