To play devil's advocate, because I do share your sentiment, especially when there are cameras immediately after you have to slow down from 100 km/h to 50 km/h, lol

But I also know that I don't know that maybe that's exactly why the camera is there. Because people are slowing down way too slow and the camera actually does save lives. I don't know, but it's plausible, no?

So what makes you think that something plausible like that couldn't also be happening in your case? For sure they like the income, but maybe that's not the full story. Has this road been safe for a long time even without the camera?

If you don't agree with the above, can we at least agree that there will be people who will speed if there is no camera because they just dgaf, but won't if there's one, independent of the question of putting one in that specific location?

I will not tell you how to break the law, but if I were you, I would try to lookup similar cases where this happened and how they did it and then add some of my own judgement.

Also, it depends on what's your precise goal: Disable them temporarily (easy to fix) or permanently (they need to completely replace it with your taxes)? Violently destroy them to "leave a message" for the authorities or maximize time where it's disabled by doing it in a way they don't realize it's disabled? The answers to these questions should be considered when choosing your method.

Oh and camera != camera, there are many different types, at least here.