Vandalized speed cameras...

[Cybrludite]

Civil disobediance at its best...

[toadmage]

It is soo bad when big brother get start on fire. I think it would be more fun to toss a blanket over the camera . It would made the same point with less matches. Next think you know people will begin to think they are allowed to move freely around the country .

[First of Two]

I solve this problem by shooting at the cars that race through my neighborhood.

It's so much fun. Everyone should try it.

*BAWK-WIKKI-WIKKI-WAW-*
*KABOOM!!!*
AIIGH! MY FACE!!!
*rattle... clank... wheeze...*

Or rig the gatsos to explode when vandalized, piercing the scofflaw with hundreds of shards of molten metal. Now that's comedy.

[black campbellq]

We need to start burning or shooting the cameras here in the US. This isn't for "safety", it's for "revenue."

[Cybrludite]

It is soo bad when big brother get start on fire. I think it would be more fun to toss a blanket over the camera . It would made the same point with less matches. Next think you know people will begin to think they are allowed to move freely around the country .

The point of the exercise is to make the remote cameras be more expense than they're worth. Toss a blanket over them, and the government profits by a blanket. Burn one of these things and they have to replace the whole shebang.

As the page mentions, these cameras are placed with more an eye to profit than for safety. It's much the same as adding taxes on tobacco "because it's bad for people's health". If it's so bad for us, ban it outright and be done with it. Don't profit further on these people's addictions.

[Tobian]

Try telling out government that! There's only one county in th UK where they are banned, Durham, because the chief there says exactly the same thing, and he gets huge flak from the Government. The biggest problem in this country is whenever a group forms to counter something, and equal and oposite group forms to fight for it: They both shout each other down, citing tailored 'evidence' back and forth, till the government slinks off and patts it's pocket of cash, by creating a 'compromise' where everybody loses, except their revenue!

[toadmage]

The point of the exercise is to make the remote cameras be more expense than they're worth. Toss a blanket over them, and the government profits by a blanket. Burn one of these things and they have to replace the whole shebang.

As the page mentions, these cameras are placed with more an eye to profit than for safety. It's much the same as adding taxes on tobacco "because it's bad for people's health". If it's so bad for us, ban it outright and be done with it. Don't profit further on these people's addictions.

I figure trying a non destroying way first to send a message , but destroying the camera should be step two.

[First of Two]

If it's so bad for us, ban it outright and be done with it. Don't profit further on these people's addictions.

We tried that with other drugs, and it led to endless bitching and moaning, and people who said that we ought to legalize and tax those drugs.

You can't win.

The cameras are only a symptom of a larger problem... they're a compromise that lets people feel like they've done something, without actually having to do anything.

What irks me is the vandals acting like they're part of the solution, when they're actually clearly part of the problem.