VERY disturbing

[CNHT]

DO remember, that Murphy's now has a classy clientele who respect each other and are not violent.

But they USED to be the 'Omega' where lots of gunfights broke out in the past.

We have more guns there now.

This is hysterical:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aeo05uPMmn4

[KBCraig]

I don't believe it's been established that these are in fact Concord-funded cameras.
I've seen the (then) NH DOT Director Sweeney testify in front of several committees that his bureaucracy placed absolutely no "red light" cameras anywhere in the state (with the exception of the cameras at toll booths)

SHE'S A LIAR. There is one at the 101/114 intersection right where Dada often does sign waves... Geesh.
Its' pointed right at the place where the cars stop -- there is no business or building or pedestrian walkway there, so it has to be for the cars.

But is it a red light camera, and does it belong to NH DOT?

And as I've noted before, some "cameras" aren't cameras. They're motion sensors to trigger the traffic lights.

[CNHT]

But is it a red light camera, and does it belong to NH DOT?

And as I've noted before, some "cameras" aren't cameras. They're motion sensors to trigger the traffic lights.

Do you mean to see who doesn't stop for red lights or is the camera lens red?
It wasn't there before, just something new. The lights worked before without it...so I have to think it's surveillance just like the ones that capture your plate # going through the tolls without paying.

[ny2nh]

On a very similar subject.....Joe Kelly Levassuer has filed to run against Guinta for mayor of Manchester. Attached is a scan of the first of his ads he is running in the Union Leader.

It reads: "Crime is out of control...One solution is to install surveillance camera's in all city parks and high crime areas."

Hello??? City-funded surveillance? I'm guessing the residents of a certain house on Central Street would be outraged by this!!

He's an embarassment to the the Republican party!! I think people should write some letters to the editor.

You could also attend Mayor Guinta's signing rally at 3:45 at City Hall Plaza....free Ben & Jerry's ice cream, too!!


[attachment deleted by admin]

[KBCraig]

But is it a red light camera, and does it belong to NH DOT?

And as I've noted before, some "cameras" aren't cameras. They're motion sensors to trigger the traffic lights.

Do you mean to see who doesn't stop for red lights or is the camera lens red?

No, that would indeed make them red light cameras. Unless people are getting tickets from those intersections, then chances are they're not red light cameras.

It wasn't there before, just something new. The lights worked before without it...so I have to think it's surveillance just like the ones that capture your plate # going through the tolls without paying.

They could be one of several things, which is why you shouldn't assume they're something nefarious.

[CNHT]

Don't worry I would never advocate voting for someone who can't spell... 

[Quantrill]

it's pointed basically at the parking lot

... which leads me to believe it's a private surveillance camera

But can they have those on the same poles as stoplights?   And why the other one across the street?

[error]

I got a couple of pictures of one of the "cameras." Notice the antenna coming off the pole next to it.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[Henry]

it's pointed basically at the parking lot

... which leads me to believe it's a private surveillance camera

But can they have those on the same poles as stoplights?   And why the other one across the street?

Yeah, I doubted at first but if it's that high up there on a stoplight and street sign pole it looks pretty nefarious to me.

[KBCraig]

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xx/236/236-130.htm

RSA 236:130

TITLE XX
TRANSPORTATION
CHAPTER 236
HIGHWAY REGULATION, PROTECTION AND CONTROL REGULATIONS
Highway Video Surveillance
Section 236:130
    236:130 Highway Surveillance Prohibited. –
    I. In this subdivision, ""surveillance'' means the act of determining the ownership of a motor vehicle or the identity of a motor vehicle's occupants on the public ways of the state or its political subdivisions through the use of a camera or other imaging device or any other device, including but not limited to a transponder, cellular telephone, global positioning satellite, or radio frequency identification device, that by itself or in conjunction with other devices or information can be used to determine the ownership of a motor vehicle or the identity of a motor vehicle' s occupants.
    II. Neither the state of New Hampshire nor its political subdivisions shall engage in surveillance on any public ways of the state or its political subdivisions.
    III. The prohibition set forth in paragraph II shall not apply where surveillance:
       (a) Is specifically authorized by statute;
       (b) Is undertaken on a case-by-case basis in the investigation of a particular violation, misdemeanor, or felony;
       (c) Is undertaken to produce images or data that:
          (1) Are viewed only at the transportation management center of the department of transportation in connection with a particular incident occurring on a public way; and
          (2) Are not recorded;
       (d) Is incidental to the monitoring of a building or other structure under the control of the state or a political subdivision of the state; or
       (e) Is undertaken for the security of the following bridges and approach structures: I-95 Piscataqua River Bridge, Sarah Mildred Long Bridge, and the Memorial Bridge, all in Portsmouth.
    IV. Nothing in this section shall prevent the creation, transmission, or recording of any images or data which cannot, by enhancement, manipulation, or otherwise, be used for surveillance.
    V. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a violation if a natural person, or guilty of a misdemeanor if any other person.

Source. 2006, 107:1, eff. July 1, 2006.

[Henry]

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/xx/236/236-130.htm

RSA 236:130

TITLE XX
TRANSPORTATION
CHAPTER 236
HIGHWAY REGULATION, PROTECTION AND CONTROL REGULATIONS
Highway Video Surveillance
Section 236:130
    236:130 Highway Surveillance Prohibited. –
    I. In this subdivision, ""surveillance'' means the act of determining the ownership of a motor vehicle or the identity of a motor vehicle's occupants on the public ways of the state or its political subdivisions through the use of a camera or other imaging device or any other device, including but not limited to a transponder, cellular telephone, global positioning satellite, or radio frequency identification device, that by itself or in conjunction with other devices or information can be used to determine the ownership of a motor vehicle or the identity of a motor vehicle' s occupants.
    II. Neither the state of New Hampshire nor its political subdivisions shall engage in surveillance on any public ways of the state or its political subdivisions.
    III. The prohibition set forth in paragraph II shall not apply where surveillance:
       (a) Is specifically authorized by statute;
       (b) Is undertaken on a case-by-case basis in the investigation of a particular violation, misdemeanor, or felony;
       (c) Is undertaken to produce images or data that:
          (1) Are viewed only at the transportation management center of the department of transportation in connection with a particular incident occurring on a public way; and
          (2) Are not recorded;
       (d) Is incidental to the monitoring of a building or other structure under the control of the state or a political subdivision of the state; or
       (e) Is undertaken for the security of the following bridges and approach structures: I-95 Piscataqua River Bridge, Sarah Mildred Long Bridge, and the Memorial Bridge, all in Portsmouth.
    IV. Nothing in this section shall prevent the creation, transmission, or recording of any images or data which cannot, by enhancement, manipulation, or otherwise, be used for surveillance.
    V. Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a violation if a natural person, or guilty of a misdemeanor if any other person.

Source. 2006, 107:1, eff. July 1, 2006.

Interesting. I'd like to find out whose it is, and it shouldn't have to require destroying it in order to see who shows up to fix it.

[Quantrill]

to clarify -
a city is a political subdivision of the state, right?

That would make these cameras illegal...   Ok really, I work ALL damn day and don't even get time to eat.  Can someone PLEASE call the city or NHDOT and figure out what's going on?

[error]

I am suspecting that they aren't cameras but radar devices which drive the traffic light.

[d_goddard]

I am suspecting that they aren't cameras but radar devices which drive the traffic light.

BINGO!!!
That's exactly what the DMV 'crat said.... they get people calling the DMV all the time, concerned that there are surveillance or stoplight cameras, when in fact they're just traffic light sensors.

[KBCraig]

I am suspecting that they aren't cameras but radar devices which drive the traffic light.

I think I already said that about three times in this thread.