Use people, not robots, to maintain traffic control

Use people, not robots, to maintain traffic control

The April 1 Vindicator con- tained an article, “Warren traffic-camera idea again fails to garner support”.

I am a very strong opponent of such devices. They are another example of a mechanical or a “red-light camera” device to replace the necessary job of wage earners — a traffic cop or a local policeman.

There are constant stories about creating jobs for America. In contrast, our leaders continue to find methods such as this device to replace any full bodied individual in making a living wage legitimately.

If the problem is to control the speed limit on any major roads, then the local police individuals should be visible with their “radar guns” instead of a mechanical “red-eye” devices to do this necessary speed control.

Most people who would be stopped for violating driving rules would not object as much as receiving a notice in the mail with a picture and an unquestionable fine that does not warrant the need for a legitimate job as a policeman or a traffic cop. Are we becoming a city as in the movie “Robotic Cop?”

If the Ohio State Highway Patrol uses radar guns for speed control, why is it not necessary for local police departments? The revenue should be used for the salary of the local policeman or the traffic cop. Therefore, they never have to worry about being out of a job or to be laid off due to budget problems by the city. They can control their own destiny.

Neil D. Frasca, Youngstown