Letters to the Editor

Cameras represent government intrusion

The controversy over Ridgeland's traffic enforcement cameras goes much deeper than whether this is an easy revenue source for the town with an unconstitutional method of collection. The issue runs parallel to the national debate on the role of government as determined by the Constitution.

The conservatives and tea party members who have written letters supporting Ridgeland's intrusive camera and ticketing policies are the same people who have shouted the loudest and most vehemently about limiting the role of government.

They want smaller government and less intrusive government -- except when it comes to pet issues, such as personal decisions between a woman and her physician. They want the government to intervene on that, but not to regulate decisions between corporations and ordinary people. This smacks of the ultimate hypocrisy -- no government involvement except for pet religious issues, when they want government to rule with an iron fist.

I guess the 11th Commandment was: "Thou shalt not speed on I-95."

If these tickets continue to be issued, how far will governments like Ridgeland be willing to go? Perhaps cameras will be hidden at local parks and tennis courts to ticket those who find it necessary to relieve themselves in the woods with no public bathrooms available. (Something that happens every day.) The photos will be compared with images on official documents, and tickets will be issued, fines collected and possibly innocent people jailed.

Let's keep the government out of our daily and personal lives.

Doug Luba

Hilton Head Island