Endangering Animal

It has long been my unwavering opinion that traffic citations should not be valid if the only evidence against the accused is a photograph taken by an automated roadside camera. If an infraction was not witnessed by an actual human being, then I fail to see how any evidence offered can be proven to be true. Film can be manipulated and a piece of photography equipment cannot testify under oath in court. It’s that simple.

Yes, I realize there are people who drive like lunatics, forever failing to consider the lives threatened by their reckless haste, and I completely understand that some cities simply don’t have enough police officers to patrol all the known trouble spots and ensure not one Krispy Kreme goes stale and uneaten. Priorities are priorities, after all.* But a high donut-to-cop ratio does not constitute a reasonable excuse for delegating the duty of traffic patrols to the electronic equivalent of trip-wire booby traps. Something that works for horse races and football replays doesn’t necessarily translate well to law enforcement. Imagine that.

Needless to say, I got a good laugh this morning reading this article about a clever Brit who has been taking full advantage of the fact that the cameras on his favorite speeding route are set up for left-hand drive vehicles:

…the cameras keep missing the driver’s face. Instead, they keep capturing clear views of a manic Muppet-like toy which the cheeky Brit has propped up on his passenger seat.

Officials have released the above photo to the public in hopes someone happens to know a Muppet-loving speed demon. I suspect if anyone knows this guy, they’ll keep clam about it. It’s just too delightful.

Some of you may be wondering why the offending lead foot cannot be identified when it’s clear his face has been deliberately distorted. Well, it turns out that the camera automatically blurs the face of the passenger for reasons involving privacy protection. Chances are Breakneck McBrit is fully aware of this useful bit of info.

There’s another a swirl on the side of the car, as well. When I reversed part of that distortion in Photoshop, it appeared to spell out a word beginning with the letter “E”. I’m guessing the camera also blurs anything that might identify things like company names in the event commercial vehicles are photographed.

I always thought Animal seemed more like a Jeep CJ7 guy. Sam the Eagle is the one I’d expect to insist on an Audi.

*I don’t want to hear about how it’s just an unverified urban legend that cops loiter in donut shops; I see it all the time. Although in the afternoons the hangout might instead be a sub shop.

Read and post comments


About kirkstarr

I draw pictures for a living.
This entry was posted in Can I Say Something? and tagged , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

One Response to Endangering Animal

  1. Red Mosquito says:

    I always figured Animal would be in some old beater, maybe a '76 chevy impala 4-door, or an old camaro, something with size and speed and horsepower. Maybe a drumkit in the passenger seat, or stuffed into the backseat.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s