While I agree, in part, with your editorial of Sept. 19 regarding red light cameras in Riverside, I believe you have missed some important elements of this “scam.”

1. The drivers that are penalized happen to be those that are breaking the law in the first place.  The law states that you are to come to a complete stop before proceeding to make a right-hand turn (if allowed).  If a policeman was stationed at the corner he/she would give you a ticket. Since budgets prevent this from happening we use cameras.

2. If you think this is unfair change the law to allow a drifting turn.

3. If indeed the revenue from the cameras is going to pay pensions, all the power to have the money generated by cameras.  Would you like your property taxes raised to pay pensions or would you like to have the funds come from a wide segment of the populace?

4. You are not an innocent if you get a ticket.  You were too lazy, distracted, or felt you were too important to obey the law as written.  The time you think you save by not coming to a complete stop will be used up by having to write a check to the village or SafeSpeed LLC.

5. I do believe that the split of $60 to Riverside and $40 to SafeSpeed is not right.  $75 to the village and $25 to the company would be more acceptable.  The company is already getting $500 per camera per month.

6. Stop complaining about paying when you break the law.

7. Oh, I agree that these cameras should not be classified as safety items. They are revenue producers only in a different form to hit the property owners in the least way.

Paul Marhoul