The real motive for traffic tickets

As someone who has recently paid $100 because of the red light photo, I can say it will be a deterrent in my future travels. However, I want to point out that though the front wheels of my van did cross the line, I was stopped at the light. The camera automatically goes off when the line is crossed regardless of whether the car advances into the intersection. My contention is that only when the "back" wheels cross the line should it be deemed as going through a red light. Also as far as the right turn on red, they can't have it both ways, either you can make a turn or you can't. Which brings me to the question is the camera for our safety or for the revenue it reaps? I have been doing classic car shows for over 33 years and was recently in Coldwater, Michigan, where there were 1,100 classic cars in attendance. The seatbelt laws only apply to cars made after 1964, so none of the classic car owners have to wear seat belts. So, when my friend (driving a new car) received a ticket for not wearing a seatbelt, the officer said it was for his safety. I guess the 1,100 classic car owners don't have to be concerned about safety. Again was this ticket issued for safety reasons or for the town revenue?

Judith Reed

Mount Prospect