Tag Archives: C4L

A4L Live! Friday Oct 22nd. Cory Bernardi Fights, Aussies Mourn & Oklahoma Pushes for Privacy!

Tomorrow on Axxiom for Liberty Radio: My co-host will be Howard Houchen, host of Road to Liberty and we will have as our guest Australian Senator Cory Bernardi. Senator Bernardi is a South Australian Liberal Party (think classical-liberalism) Senator who consistently fights for individual Freedoms, free-market principles, less central government, and sound money.  Also expect to hear representatives from local groups who are pushing for privacy rights.  (more below)

Listen live from 6-8 pm CST at Rule of Law Radio


“I am advised the Thompson family have broken no law, they have no outstanding environmental infringements, they have done everything asked of them by government, they are popular in their local community and nearby towns, and yet they still face ruin. They run a profitable business—or they ran a profitable business. But an over-officious and what would appear to be an overzealous government bureaucracy has cut the profitability of their business and their ability to access any capital.”

Senator Cory Bernardi to Parliament, 6:54 pm 28 Sept. 2010

Janet Thompson is from Howard’s hometown of Hugo Oklahoma.

More about the Thompson’s case


The Death of Property Rights

Please and join us for the
Funeral Service

To be held on the steps of
Parliament House Perth
11:00 a.m.
Monday, 25 October 2010

“wear black, and bring your truck”

Read More

Previous News on this issue;

The Future of Property Rights and the Impact of Hyper-Environmentalism in America?


Also Friday on AxXiom For Liberty;

we will hear from Marcus Kesler from the Oklahoma Pirate Party about an upcoming rally at the Oklahoma State Capitol October 30th, from 2 pm until 5 pm, Freedom- Not Fear,  to call attention to the growing surveillance in our nation

And Kirk Shelly, representing the Campaign for Liberty about a petition drive to protect our personal information.

May 7th, 2010 AxXiom for Liberty Show Notes -The Cameras are Coming DOWN!

The Rule of Law Radio Network

AxXiom for Liberty

May 7th, 2010 Show #6

The Cameras are Coming DOWN!

Shawn Dow, Chairman of AZ Citizens AGAINST Photo Enforcement


Jeff Greenspan 2nd Vice Chair of the Maricopa GOP

with analysis of SB 1070


Chad Dornsife, Best Highways Safety Practices


Fusion Center (spying) Report on CA Open Carry Group


Oklahoma legislative issues;


National Legislation

S 2820 “Preserving Records of Terrorists & Criminal Transactions Act of 2009″

“Its not a work of art” says King

Senate Hearing Promotes Anti-American Watchlist Bills   Friday, May 07, 2010

Since September 11, 2001, it’s been clear that terrorists who hate America will exploit our weaknesses in order to destroy us. This week, Sen. Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.), Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) and New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg exploited Americans’ fear of terrorism to push their latest anti-gun proposal, and in doing so showed that they’re willing to destroy other parts of the Constitution, to choke its Second Amendment.

On Tuesday, as chairman of the Senate Homeland Security and Government Affairs Committee, Lieberman held a hearing to give Lautenberg and King the opportunity to promote their bills S.1317 and H.R.2159, to prohibit the possession of firearms by people on the FBI’s “terrorist watchlist,” and Lautenberg’s S. 2820, to maintain records of approved instant background check transactions for a minimum of 180 days. The watchlist bills further propose that a person seeking relief in court  from these new restrictions would be prevented from examining and challenging “evidence” against him, and that the judge deciding whether the person had been watchlisted for good reason be limited to summaries and redacted versions of such “evidence.”



Aaron Titus Testimony: Terrorist Watch List and Second Amendment Rights (Video- 4th panelist)


Great response to S 1317 and S. 2820

Written Statement of the Liberty Coalition on

“Terrorists and Guns: The Nature of the Threat and Proposed Reforms”

Today’s hearing examines two bills, S.1317 “Denying Firearms and Explosives to Dangerous Terrorists Act of 2009” and S.2820, “Preserving Records of Terrorists & Criminal Transactions Act of 2009” (“PROTECT Act of 2009”). In reality, these two bills should be re-named the “Gun Owners Are Probably Terrorists Act,” and the “National Firearm Registry Act,” respectively. Collectively these bills strip citizens of their enumerated Constitutional Right to Bear Arms without any meaningful due process, and create a national firearms registry. The same Constitutional Due Process provided by the 5th and 14th Amendments that prevents Congress from incarcerating a citizen based on mere suspicion also prevents Congress from revoking a citizen’s Second Amendment right to bear arms. For that and other reasons, the Liberty Coalition opposes these bills.

More importantly, today’s discussion misses the point entirely. This committee should not spend time debating whether to take away Terrorists’ guns, bombs, cell phones, cars, or other instruments of terrorism. If a person is a dangerous terrorist, then he should be thrown in jail. As a felon, convicted terrorists should not, and cannot under current law, own guns.





Chad Dornsife http://www.BHSPI.com and http://www.Motoristsrights.com

Colter’s Guide to the Police States of America


Join and see the full video-http://www.motoristunion.org

of the Street Surveillance Practices in Transportation Control Centers


Guest-Jeff Greenspan, AZ Maricopa County GOP 2nd Vice chairman

  • Referenced-Jeff’s Campaign for Liberty site with more information on SB 1070
  • Mark Lerner, The Constitutional Alliance

Campaign for Liberty: AZ Senate poised to turn you in to Homeland Security

Published 03/19/2010

The Arizona State Senate is considering two bills that will turn your driver’s license into a national ID card and share your personal information with the US Department of Homeland Security.

SB1070 and HB2632 are ostensibly anti-illegal immigration bills. As such, there are good things in there, such as elimination of sanctuary cities.

However, these bills have a sneak provision in them that turns the Arizona Driver’s License into a national ID. Section 2. 11-1051, subsections F.1-3. specifically require that the state obtain prior clearance from the US Department of Homeland Security before you can obtain or renew your Driver’s License. Additionally, it requires data exchange of your domicile information.


Shawn Dow Chairman of Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar


Camera Fraud

Should Arizona keep using photo radar cameras?

By Shawn Dow
Chairman/Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar

The people of Arizona have been lied to. They were sold a system that was set up to video record their vehicle on state roads and impose an unfair tax on driving. It had nothing to do with safety, although that was a clearly stated goal. It was completely about generating revenue, under the guise of safety.

Initially, the photo traffic enforcement system on Arizona freeways and interstates was installed and deployed after the state signed a contract with Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia in 2008. The contract stated that only drivers exceeding the speed limit by 11 mph or more would be “photographed.” There was no mention of continuous capture of every car on the road with video, which is what the fixed cameras are actually doing.

The term “photo radar” is a misnomer when referring to the fixed camera system, because it is actually video that is being taken. Even if it could be argued that the public has no right to privacy on state-owned roads, the system itself is tragically flawed and in fact, violates basic individual rights protected by the US and Arizona Constitutions.

Twenty years ago, if a state agency like the Arizona Department of Public Safety or a state official like the Governor had suggested that motorists should be video-taped twenty four hours a day, three hundred sixty five days a year, they would have been called “Communists.” Not only was deception used to spread the current system of photo traffic enforcement in Arizona, it is being used to excuse its continued presence in our country.

Read More;


Arizona to eliminate speed cameras on highways

By PAUL DAVENPORT Associated Press Writer

May 6, 2010

Arizona is ending a groundbreaking and contentious program that put speed cameras along Phoenix-area freeways and in vans deployed across the state.

Opponents have argued the cameras open the door for wider “Big Brother” surveillance and are more about making money than safety. The program has been the target of an initiative measure proposed for the November ballot.

Even Gov. Jan Brewer has said she doesn’t like the cameras, and her intention to end the program was first disclosed in her January budget proposal. That was followed by a non-renewal letter sent by the Arizona Department of Public Safety this week to the private company that runs the program.

Scottsdale-based Redflex said Thursday that the 36 fixed cameras will be turned off and the 40 vans taken off highways on July 16, the day after its state contract expires.

[. . .]Shawn Dow, a leader of the initiative campaign, welcomed the decision to end the program but said the drive’s organizers still plan to file petition signatures on the July 1 deadline to qualify it for the November ballot.

The end of the state program does not affect local governments’ use of cameras for speed enforcement, but the proposed ballot measure would prohibit state and local governments from using cameras for both speed violations and red-light running.

Read more: http://www.kansascity.com/2010/05/06/1929778/arizona-to-eliminate-speed-cameras.html#ixzz0nDfbizHF

Initiative : Wording

The Summary:

This initiative measure serves to preserve the balance between the rights of individuals and the need for effective law enforcement. This initiative measure prohibits the issuance or filing of traffic related citations for alleged violations that were detected through the use of photo radar and other photo enforcement equipment. This initiative measure keeps the enforcement of our laws in the hands of trained law enforcement officers who are authorized by the people of Arizona, protects the citizens of Arizona from the abuses that accompany the outsourcing of law enforcement to private, for-profit corporations and ensures that the purpose of law enforcement remains to serve and protect and not to generate revenue for governments.

Initative Measure – Full Wording:



Arizona: The Surveillance State

March 4, 2010 – 6:00 AM | by: Douglas Kennedy

For years Arizona has been known as the “sunset state,” but lately some residents simply call it the “surveillance state.”

“They track us everywhere we go,” says Phoenix resident Shawn Dow. “It’s unbelievable. I can’t go anywhere and not have a camera tracking me.”

Dow is now trying to change all that with a ballot initiative this November that would ban all ticket cameras in Arizona.

“I’m tired of being constantly watched,” he said. We’re all being tracked like cattle.”

In 2007, Arizona became the first state in the country to install ticket cameras state-wide, meaning there are cameras on most state highways; there are cameras at many intersections; and there are camera-vans videotaping on side streets.

The owner of any car caught going over the speed limit or running a red light receives a ticket by mail.

“This is all about safety,” says Jay Heiler, an executive at RedFlex, the company that manufacturers most of the state’s ticket cameras. “If you enforce traffic laws you are going to get more compliance with them, and when you get more compliance with traffic laws you get more safety.”

Read More; http://liveshots.blogs.foxnews.com/2010/03/04/arizona-the-surveillance-state/

Arizona Citizens AGAINST Photo Radar

  1. Safety. That fancy electronic box with a camera and flash bulb might catch a speeder or red-light runner, but it won’t pull over the speeder or red-light runner that’s drunk/high that heading towards your car at the next intersection. That’s why we have police officers.
  2. Privacy. We don’t believe the role of government is to spy on its citizens, no matter how well intentioned such a program might be. “Those Who Sacrifice Liberty For Security Deserve Neither,” said Ben Franklin, and we’re inclined to agree.
  3. Sovereignty. Imagine waking up one morning to see this Australian police car in your rear-view mirror on the Loop 101. Imagine the foreign-born officer walking up to your window and demanding your information from you. Then, imagine your outrage when he has the nerve to write YOU a citation, only to find out that your government has outsourced law enforcement to another nation. Such a scenario isn’t a dystopian future, but rather business-as-usual for the cities and state agencies that rely on Rexflex Group, the “Umbrella Corporation” of traffic control systems. And yes, they’re an Australian company.
  4. Due Process. When a police officer stops you and writes a ticket, he has to verify the person’s identity and make sure he gets his paperwork right in order for the ticket to stand up in court. In addition, you’re personally “served” the complaint by the police officer.With automated enforcement, cities and the state send you a copy of the ticket via mail, and according to their own laws such a mailing is not proper service. They instead hope you’ll incriminate yourself by responding to the complaint. Lets be clear: unless you voluntarily waive your rights and respond to some random solicitation in the mail, the only form of proper service for a photo radar ticket is to be served by a licensed and bonded process server. In fact, the notices sent in the mail usually threaten you into compliance, saying that if you don’t respond, you’ll have to pay for your own service if they choose to hire a process server!
  5. Cronyism. We’re all for free-market capitalism, but by commercializing law enforcement activities and awarding no-bid contracts to such companies, we’re rewarding mediocrity. Today it’s “just” traffic citations, tomorrow it could be Blackwater taking over the functions of the Mesa Police Department. When corporations and governments conspire against the will of the people, rights are lost and freedoms are destroyed.


Breaking: The Redflex Freeway Cameras Are Coming Down

Just when the Arizona Summer Heat is hitting its peak, the motorists of this state will have a reason to celebrate. On July 1st, 2010 the contract between the Arizona DPS and Redflex Traffic Systems will expire and not be renewed. Redflex broke the news in a Press Release to the Australian Securities Exchange, dated May 6th, 2010.

[. . .]Regardless of the spin put on this story by Redflex or DPS, know that public opinion and the efforts of CameraFRAUD and Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar
played a major role in this decision. The work of our volunteers and the voices of our supporters are vital in the effort to ban the scam. In other words, your voice has been heard loud and clear.

We found a way to make 10% of the cameras come down and we won’t stop until the other 90% do as well.

Read more;


Press Release

CameraFRAUD and Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar To Hold Press Conference at 5 pm

[Phoenix, AZ] May 6th, 2010 – In reaction to the news that the Arizona Department of Public Safety (DPS) will not renew their contract with Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia, to operate the state-wide freeway photo traffic enforcement system, a press conference will be held outside the Phoenician Resort in Phoenix at 5 p.m today.

The original contract was signed as part of a mandate in the 2008 state budget submitted by then Governor Janet Napolitano, who has since left to become Secretary of Homeland Security. The original intent was to install more than 200 fixed camera locations throughout Arizona freeways as well as deploy mobile units to snap photos of motorists in alleged violation of the speed limit. Arizona Citizens Against Photo Radar formed shortly thereafter to protest the proliferation of these cameras citing that the program violated several protections in the Arizona and US Constitutions and had an abhorrent safety record.

The freeway contract ends officially on July 1st. Redflex will be removing the fixed cameras along with their metal housings and the mobile units will no longer be deployed. DPS has said that this move signals a change in direction for the focus of the department.

Posted April 16th

Scam Cams: Time To Declare Our Independence

Recent changes have been proposed to your state reps by Redflex that opens the path towards the automation and privatization of the judicial branch of government.

It’s amazing how much time has passed since a loose-knit group of rookies to politics gathered in early August of 2008 to discuss changes that were coming to our state.

The changes that came were more like a freight train in the night: the barking, stray-dog annoyance of a mere traffic-related topic, “photo radar,” was to turn into nothing less than a rabid pack of electronic vultures: the statewide construction of a surveillance network.

[. . ]And don’t be fooled: your State Representatives and Senators have made a clear, distinct decision to ignore the will of the people by not only permitting Redflex and American Traffic Solutions to continue their theft, but by subsidizing it.

[. . .]It’s become increasingly clear to this writer that the surveillance network of cameras that record video constantly and use automatic license plate recognition to track drivers is only the beginning.

Recent changes have been proposed to your state reps by Redflex that opens the path towards the automation and privatization of the judicial branch of government.

Arizona’s SB1443 and SB1018 allows Redflex to use uniformed police officers to act as private employees for the company’s “notices of violation” to be served. The real punchline to this sick joke that’s being played on our liberty is that the “papers” being served have, at this point, never been filed with an actual court of law.

The first thought that comes to mind is the contradictory nature of photo radar supposedly “freeing up officers” only to have those same officers getting paid overtime to hand deliver papers while wearing the full “color of law.”

…He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance…

The second, and more disturbing outcome of this arrangement is Redflex becoming, in essence, a private, foreign court: able to summon and “detain” a citizen with a hinderance of a neatly printed—and false– violation

[. . .] Simple. Redflex, American Traffic Solutions, IBM, and Xerox all have a vested interest in automating many “tedious” areas of the criminal justice system, and making a killing in the process. Municipal contracts are always seen as lucrative, and courts are no exception. Due process and “proper courtroom procedures” serve no purpose when the party being hindered becomes the state itself.

…He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws…

Read More;



Photo Tickets Pad Campaign Coffers of Arizona Politicians

Arizona politicians have collected $36,265,795 in campaign cash from a tax on speeding tickets since 1999.

A tax levied on speeding tickets funds the re-election efforts of two-thirds of Arizona’s politicians and provides lawmakers with a personal financial incentive to protect controversial photo enforcement programs. In 1999, a ten percent surcharge was imposed on all traffic tickets to create the “Citizens Clean Election Fund.” The fund allows politicians to avoid tedious fundraising efforts.

After raising just $5 each from 220 people in a district, candidates for public office qualify for public financing money to match private expenditures. In effect, these lawmakers collect $16.50 for their campaigns each time a photo radar ticket is issued on an Arizona freeway.

This adds up to big money. In 2008, traffic tickets generated $10,095,771 in revenue for the clean elections fund. Out of this amount, $7,710,739 million was disbursed to lawmakers and candidates during the primary and general elections — an average of $72,063 each. In just the past four months, the new freeway speed camera program has already added another $3.3 million to the total amount collected for lawmakers. Over the past four election cycles, Arizona politicians collected a total of $36,265,795 in campaign cash from the tax on speeding tickets. Opponents of the state photo ticketing program are crying foul.

“Photo radar pays for politicians to get elected,” Shawn Dow, a volunteer for the activist group CameraFraud.com, told TheNewspaper. “Voters want the cameras gone but the politicians want them to stay since it pays for their election. This is the reason that the people believe our government is corrupt.”



Arizona not monkeying with masked speeder

State cameras catch lead-footed driver 37 times, but he refuses to pay fines


Red Light Camera Studies Roundup
A collection of red light camera studies over the last decade shows red light cameras have serious side-effects. http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/04/430.asp Updated 1/10

Over the past decade, a number of studies have examined the use of red light cameras. The most relevant studies examined the devices in light of changes in traffic and engineering conditions made at intersections during the study period and pulled actual police reports to examine the particular causes of each collision. The following studies are the most comprehensive available:

  • A 2008 University of South Florida report found:
    “Comprehensive studies conclude cameras actually increase crashes and injuries, providing a safety argument not to install them…. public policy should avoid conflicts of interest that enhance revenues for government and private interests at the risk of public safety.”
    Read a summary
    Full copy, 80k pdf
    Study author responds to criticisms
  • A 2007 Virginia Department of Transportation study found:
    “The cameras were associated with an increase in total crashes… The aggregate EB results suggested that this increase was 29%… The cameras were associated with an increase in the frequency of injury crashes… The aggregate EB results suggested an 18% increase, although the point estimates for individual jurisdictions were substantially higher (59%, 79%, or 89% increases) or lower (6% increase or a 5% decrease).”
    Read a summary
    Full copy, 1mb pdf
    Study author responds to criticisms
  • A 2006 Winnipeg, Canada city audit found:
    “The graph shows an increase of 58% in the number of traffic collisions from 2003 to 2004…. Contrary to long-term expectations, the chart shows an increase in claims at each level of damage with the largest percentage increase appearing at the highest dollar value.”
    Read a summary
    Full copy, 541k pdf
  • A 2005 Virginia DOT study found:
    “The cameras are correlated with an increase in total crashes of 8% to 17%.”
    Read a summary
    Full copy, 1.7mb pdf
  • In 2005, The Washington Post found:
    “The analysis shows that the number of crashes at locations with cameras more than doubled, from 365 collisions in 1998 to 755 last year. Injury and fatal crashes climbed 81 percent, from 144 such wrecks to 262. Broadside crashes, also known as right-angle or T-bone collisions, rose 30 percent, from 81 to 106 during that time frame.”
    Read a summary
    Full article on the Post website
  • A 2004 North Carolina A&T University study found:
    “Our findings are more pessimistic, finding no change in angle accidents and large increases in rear-end crashes and many other types of crashes relative to other intersections.”
    Read a summary
    Full copy, 1.7mb pdf
  • A 2003 Ontario Ministry of Transportation study found:
    “Compared to the average number of reported collisions occurring in the before period, the average yearly number of reported collisions increased 15.1 per cent in the after period.”
    Read a summary
    Full copy, 1.5mb pdf
  • A 1995 Australian Road Research Board study found:
    “The results of this study suggest that the installation of the RLC at these sites did not provide any reduction in accidents, rather there has been increases in rear end and adjacent approaches accidents on a before and after basis and also by comparison with the changes in accidents at intersection signals.”
    Read a summary
    Full copy, 2.4mb pdf
  • A 1995 Monash University (Australia) study found:
    “a simple correlation analysis was undertaken for red light running data in the current study and revealed no significant relationship between the frequency of crashes at RLC and non-RLC sites and differences in red light running behaviour.”
    Read a summary

Related Reports and Studies

The importance of the yellow warning signal time in reducing the instances of red light running is found in the following reports:

  • A 2004 Texas Transportation Institute study found:
    “An increase in yellow duration of 1.0 seconds is associated with a [crash frequency] of about 0.6, which corresponds to a 40 percent reduction in crashes.”
    Read a summary
    Full copy, 1.5mb pdf
  • A 2001 report by the Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives found:
    “The changes in the yellow signal timing regulations have resulted in the inadequate yellow times. And these inadequate yellow times are the likely cause of almost 80 percent of red light entries.”
    Full version with summary