Speed Camera on South Rolling Road Vandalized
Someone spray-painted the exterior of the camera overnight on Saturday.
Photos
The box that holds the speed camera at South Rolling Road and Brook Road was vandalized early Sunday morning, after someone spray-painted the box.
As of Monday morning, the camera was operational and the spray paint had been removed.
The camera was installed in April as a third location along South Rolling Road to catch speeders. The other two boxes are by Catonsville High School.
The box is the same box that was set on fire, roughly two weeks after it was installed.
On Sunday night, the box was still covered with black spray paint. The camera itself is removed at the end of every day and put back the next morning.
For more news and information about Catonsville, follow Catonsville Patch on Facebook, Twitter or sign up for our newsletters.
DARRELL HAMMERBACKER
7:13 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
Wow! What a shame! The County can't even Police their own Equiptment.
CerahAnd
7:32 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
The real shame is that the we have to keep paying for this thing to be repaired. Who thought it was a good idea to put it where it could be easily accessed? Looks like it is just easy to vandalize. Get rid of it, or affix them to tall poles where they aren't so easily destroyed. But stop coming up with ideas that seem to unnecessarily waste money. It would be interesting to see the cost of county man hours to shuttle this thing around/plus repairs and maintenance, compared to the county dollars generated.
Geoffrey Schoenbaum
7:37 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
I don't believe speeding on Rolling is a serious problem that warrants intrusive govt monitoring of our behavior in this way. And it seems unlikely the cameras are preventing accidents, since I saw one just in front of the camera a few weeks ago - the first I had ever seen on Rolling in 15 years of living here! Thus we have turned a minor speeding problem in our neighborhood into a major problem with firebombing terrorists and vandals (in the words of the local press). I'd prefer having speeding going on a block from my house thank you. I appeal to our local representative to reverse his position and advocate for the removal of these devices.
Hilton
8:43 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
Mr. Schoenbaum - I have traveled that stretch of South Rolling Road at least 5 days a week for nearly 20 years. Prior to the speed cameras being installed, if I drove at the speed limit, or even exceeded it by 5 to 10 mph, I would be repeatedly passed on the stretch of the road that is two lanes. A neighbor was involved in a fatal accident at the intersection of S. Rolling and Newburg caused by speeding motorcyclists. On multiple occasions I have seen motorists ignore pedestrians and bicyclists who clearly had the right of way and nearly strike them. You are absolutely wrong when you say that there is a "minor speeding problem" on South Rolling Road. Speeding is endemic there, as commuters race to acces I-195. Why don't you join the scores of high school students who have to try to cross S. Rolling Rd on a school day during rush hour, and then decide if the problem is "minor." Catching speeders breaking the law on a public road is not "intrusive govt monitoring." It is an attempt to keep people from being killed.
Jean
8:59 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
If you haven't seen accidents on S. Rolling in 15 years, I suppose it is because you don't live on S. Rolling. I see them frequently (and you may want to check out past articles and comments on this issue, as I won't re-hash them here). Speeding on S. Rolling is anything but a minor problem. If people took responsibility for their actions, the government would not need to step in.
Authorized User
12:17 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Hilton,
When was the fatal accident you mentioned at Rolling and Newberg?
What about the lazy drivers who insist in making an illegal left from McCurley onto Newberg through the traffic circle? What about the drivers on Hiulton who drive on the wrong side of the traffic island on Hilton near McCurley?
Philip Fryer
7:41 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
Teenage foolishness,
Nick Z.
8:35 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
If people didn't speed, there would be no need (or money for) these cameras.
Rosebud
8:44 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
I totally agree with CerahAnd. Mount it permanently to the pole or take it away forever. I too appeal to our local rep to change his position on this issue. I'm not against the camera near the school zone "if" and that's a BIG IF, it's helped to protect our children. Has this been determined? When the children are present, there is so much traffic backed up on Rolling Rd that there would be no way anyone could speed through there. So I'm not sure what the point of all this is?
George Brookhart
9:04 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
People use all kind of term and slogans to justify their need to speed. Slow down and its not an issue. They're intrusive only because it won't allow people to speed.
Mari
10:40 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
Lots of Goof Off should take care of this one - and by that, I mean the spray on product that will remove the paint without damaging the finish, not the goof off person/people who did this.
Jim Himel
11:55 am on Monday, July 30, 2012
Top on my list of terrorists are irresponsible drivers who pilot 2 ton steel killing machines through this community ignoring posted speed limits, putting at risk my family and the many children in our neighborhood. After years of putting up with these terrorists flying through our neighborhood, the residents of Beechwood and Beaumont voted to have speed bumps installed on our two streets later this year. And to those terrorists who exceed the posted limit in our neighborhood, we offer the following WARNING: Government installed speed bumps may be "intrusive" to your rear end !!
Joe
5:56 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
The use of the word 'terrorist' to describe speeders seems a little hyperbolic there Jim. It minimizes true terrorism and makes the term like 'racist' which is far far overused as to make it just another word. And am I to believer Jim you never drove beyond the speed limit at some point in your life?
Is it YOU who drives down past N Rolling toward the Old Fred circle on Edmondson ave at 25 mph with no cars in front of or anywhere around you? THAT my friend is as dangerous as speeding when conditions permit. Driving beyond the posted speed limit should be judged by the conditions permitting. If you are doing 40 in a 25 zone when there are no cars around during a time of day pedestrians are nowhere to be found should not cost you points and fines. There is a legal term for that I cannot think of at the moment.
CerahAnd
8:38 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
What's irresponsible here is your rhetoric, Jim. Speeders are dangerous, but they're not terrorists. And comparing speeders to terrorists, is just plain fodder for the impressionable mindless. Is someone who is going 32 in a 30mph zone a "terrorist?" Where do you draw the line--35 in a 30, 40 in a 30? And "WE" offer no warning, because you don't speak for the neighborhood. The neighborhood wants all children, residents, and drivers to be safe, but we certainly don't want this kind of pro-gov't flame fanning presenting itself as indicative of the majority.
Mary Toth
5:16 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
I used to live near the site of the first speed camera installed in Howard County--maybe in the country. It is the intersection of Rt. 175 and Thunder Hill Road. A beloved school teacher was in her car with her young son. She was attempting a right turn on to Rt. 175. A truck tried to beat the light and hit her car broadside, driving her car across the median and on to the shoulder of the opposite side of the road. The teacher was killed outright. Her son was severely and permanently disabled. It is easy to be annoyed, even angry, at the presence of speed cameras. But some young father lost both his wife and his son that day. Years later that dad must still pay the price for those seconds of carelessness. And that young boy--now a young adult--will never live the life he dreamed of. Am I in favor of speed cameras? You bet I am.
Geoffrey Atkinson
5:47 pm on Monday, July 30, 2012
I love that camera. G I bet the reason you think the speeding on S Rolling is minor is that up by where you turn off the traffic is backed up during rush hour so you don't get the pleasure of the 55+ MPH yuppies running you down as you try to pull out... which is the real shame if it all: this problem is predominantly caused by so called professionals!
Meg
1:57 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
I hate to say it but speed is a problem everywhere. I live on a cul de sac and pray for my life everyday due to people speeding around the corner to get to their driveway. I guess we need camaras everywhere.
Maggie McGinnis
8:23 am on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
I'd be curious to know if the cameras really stop speeding or just slow it within a hundred feet of the camera. If someone has accurate research results please let us know. Also do the speed cameras actually have much more of an effect than the illuminated speed readers do to remind folks to slow down?
Windriver
6:06 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
DC Police Chief Lanier once called for the banning of the GPS based warning system that some entrepreneur dreamed up a while back. You could download onto your GPS the latest locations of speed cams. You could upload locations to the site if you found one. She was adamant that that was not to stand. Why? Because it, I will paraphrase, 'it slowed people down only where the cams were'. Libtranslation? 'It affected revenue.'
Gary Lapchak
1:47 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Remember it's a fee not a TAX. Just another way of O"Malley taking our money.
Windriver
5:57 pm on Tuesday, July 31, 2012
Now they refer to such a "cost" as a "penalty fee tax". See States v ObamaCare.
Nick Z.
9:53 am on Thursday, August 2, 2012
Its not a fee or a tax, its a fine. A fine for breaking the law, and totally avoidable. Think of it as your own personal tax cut for not speeding.