Here we go again? Bring it on! It ain't over 'til it's over.
This judge is right. I have no objection to ticket-issuing traffic light or speeding cameras that are put in place solely for the purpose of increasing safety in a dangerous location, with plenty of warning signs.
But cameras that are put in place primarily to raise revenue for local governments and the private companies which entice local governments to put them should be outlawed. They're just a modern day twist on the backroad speed traps with the 20mph sign hidden behind the tree and a cop who's the justice of the peace issuing fines to pay his salary.
How do you tell the difference between cameras for revenue and cameras for safety? On the revenue ones, you can't easily get a fair hearing, tickets are issued indiscriminately without somebody studying the film, there are fees or fines if you have a hearing, and the company takes a slice of the action rather than a flat fee for the equipment.
This judge is right. I have no objection to ticket-issuing traffic light or speeding cameras that are put in place solely for the purpose of increasing safety in a dangerous location, with plenty of warning signs.
But cameras that are put in place primarily to raise revenue for local governments and the private companies which entice local governments to put them should be outlawed. They're just a modern day twist on the backroad speed traps with the 20mph sign hidden behind the tree and a cop who's the justice of the peace issuing fines to pay his salary.
How do you tell the difference between cameras for revenue and cameras for safety? On the revenue ones, you can't easily get a fair hearing, tickets are issued indiscriminately without somebody studying the film, there are fees or fines if you have a hearing, and the company takes a slice of the action rather than a flat fee for the equipment.
I differ with you on that. I object to automated enforcement, I like to face my accuser, and want a sworn police officer to serve any citation on me personally. I think mailing a citation to the owner of the vehicle, with no proof whatsoever that the registered owner was driving should be made illegal.
Furthermore, I think the fines for any automated enforcement system should be set at exactly $5, and 100% of that money should go to affordable housing, no money to the city, the traffic camera company, or the courts.
The fine in Fullerton is $358 by the way, I think that includes the court "penalty assessment". For automated enforcement they should have to use other, non-fine funds to pay for all that, and to pay their camera vendor.
The first time you get one of these cursed tickets you get an immediate sense of how unjust they are. What about the constitutional right to face your accuser?
The one and only time I got one of these tickets was for going 3 miles over the speed limit in Portland and it cost me over $180. needless to say I was pacing the cars around me, so the sense being coerced by the system to cough up some baksheesh is more than disappointing.
It makes you think bad thoughts about the motives of our fine and pure elected local officials -- that are of course only motivated by the desire for the betterment of our lovely law abiding community.
I agree that automated enforcement is not fair. The camera doesn't catch everything around you. You might have to barely run a red to avoid an accident due to the car behind you tailgating you, and a police officer might not give you a ticket...but the automated camera sure will.
The article states, "police departments have defended the cameras, saying they reduce high-injury T-bone collisions that occur when motorists run red lights."
What about the increased number of rear end accidents. They also ticket on not stopping on a right turn on red. How is this reducing the number of "T-bone collisions?
The article states, "police departments have defended the cameras, saying they reduce high-injury T-bone collisions that occur when motorists run red lights."
They also ticket on not stopping on a right turn on red.
Rolling - or "California" stops are not allowed in any of the written traffic laws I have seen. They all pretty much state the same thing - "permitted AFTER a full stop has been made." Rolling up to a light that has just turned red and continuing to make a right turn before the traffic gets across the intersection is breaking the law. In my county several cameras have been set up to stop this practice as many illegal turners also do not turn into the correct lane but often swing across 2 or even 3 lanes.
-- ɐ‾nsǝɹ
Just one click away from the end of the Internet
If you've ever been to So Cal, you know how short the yellow/amber lights are compared to other places. This contributes to the "trap" issue of the red light cameras. They even have them for "no right turn on red"...ouch!
You can read the whole article here:
http://tinyurl.com/5nlvuy
I would expect to see this guy get over turned, in a higher court. Unfortunately theses cams are here to stay they just make to much money for the cities.
I don't agree with them in the least, so all we can do is use the POI files that are feverishly maintained for accuracy, and then be aware of your surroundings at all times.
-- Using Android Based GPS.The above post and my sig reflects my own opinions, expressed for the purpose of informing or inspiring, not commanding. Naturally, you are free to reject or embrace whatever you read.
People should organize get some money and go after the cops who are supposed to protect and serve us. Have you noticed they don't protect and server anymore? Rather they intimidate and prey upon us all in the "name of _ fill in the blank with some bull crap here".
This is all about the money - that's it! Stealing from people who work for a living and can barely get by let alone fight a friggin ticket.
Interesting hot button topic, eh? As an ex-Californian, I've stayed interested through the years on how the"property tax" revolution affected life in general. Most everyone loved having their property taxes cut, but it seemed that all that it really did was shift the revenue gathering elsewhere. So now a goverment (state, city, county) will do anything to gather a buck and now there are red-light and speeding cameras to go along with radar and lidar and traffic planes and...
I'd tend to agree with markbrown that it hits those who "work for a living" the hardest. Here in Washington the traffic ticket lawyers are a slam dunk to get out of a ticket but you end up paying them instead of the state (city, county, etc). If you got the bucks to buy a high-end vehicle, you definitely have the bucks for the lawyer. On the flip-side, if you don't have a habit of rolling red lights or speeding, it's not really a problem. Don't think that I'm above speeding or don't roll the occasional red, but if you play, sometimes you gotta pay...
I most definitely see myself downloading the red light and speed cameras POI. It's just like buying a radar detector...if you didn't do anything wrong, why would you need it?
I once explained to a co-worker that you can make a right on red after a full and complete stop, when nobody is coming across you and she thought I was crazy. She said a right on red is just that, no need to stop or look for traffic.
People in my neighborhood don't even slow down for a right on red.
I once explained to a co-worker that you can make a right on red after a full and complete stop, when nobody is coming across you and she thought I was crazy. She said a right on red is just that, no need to stop or look for traffic.
People in my neighborhood don't even slow down for a right on red.
Which is why there are so many cameras set up to catch these uniformed members of society.
-- ɐ‾nsǝɹ
Just one click away from the end of the Internet
Look at this link for a interesting story about teens putting fake license plates on cars and then speeding through cameras to get tickets sent to the wrong person.
If the police don’t Protect and Serve.
When your home gets burglarized or your car gets stolen or worse Hijacked, Who you going to call?
-- "Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming---WOW!! WHAT A RIDE!!!"
Member 2854
When we lived in the city and were burglarized, they said that unless the dollar value was above a certain amount(we were newlyweds and didn't have "stuff") they wouldn't even come out. If we wanted a police report for insurance, we'd have to go to the station because they were too busy.
Same city - within six months of that - my car was parked (yes - legally) along the street, when a taxi cab driver decided to squeeze between the line of traffic, and my car and several other cars while trying to make an additional lane for just himself. He sideswiped more than one car and kept going, making it a hit and run. The same police department wouldn't do anything further than to fill out a report - even though SEVERAL witnesses stayed to offer their services because, as it turned out - Chicago Taxi Drivers aren't liked that much. Police wouldn't take any of their information because they weren't involved in the accidents... By the way - the Taxi Cab Driver was uninsured, as was the cab company he drove for as was later found out by my insurance company. (because the witnesses all gave me their statements and contact information which I forwarded to the insurance company, driver description, car license plate, company, etc...)
That said - Not the Chicago Police Department.
Any other department in the suburbs - yep, in a heartbeat. I am amazed at the amount of assistance and help that I've seen many of them provide.
-- And now, back to your regularly scheduled forum - already in progress . . .
here we go again
...
----- Magellan Maestro 5310 ----- Free Garmin Nüvi 270 -----
The judge is right
Here we go again? Bring it on! It ain't over 'til it's over.
This judge is right. I have no objection to ticket-issuing traffic light or speeding cameras that are put in place solely for the purpose of increasing safety in a dangerous location, with plenty of warning signs.
But cameras that are put in place primarily to raise revenue for local governments and the private companies which entice local governments to put them should be outlawed. They're just a modern day twist on the backroad speed traps with the 20mph sign hidden behind the tree and a cop who's the justice of the peace issuing fines to pay his salary.
How do you tell the difference between cameras for revenue and cameras for safety? On the revenue ones, you can't easily get a fair hearing, tickets are issued indiscriminately without somebody studying the film, there are fees or fines if you have a hearing, and the company takes a slice of the action rather than a flat fee for the equipment.
JMoo On
I differ with you on that.....
This judge is right. I have no objection to ticket-issuing traffic light or speeding cameras that are put in place solely for the purpose of increasing safety in a dangerous location, with plenty of warning signs.
But cameras that are put in place primarily to raise revenue for local governments and the private companies which entice local governments to put them should be outlawed. They're just a modern day twist on the backroad speed traps with the 20mph sign hidden behind the tree and a cop who's the justice of the peace issuing fines to pay his salary.
How do you tell the difference between cameras for revenue and cameras for safety? On the revenue ones, you can't easily get a fair hearing, tickets are issued indiscriminately without somebody studying the film, there are fees or fines if you have a hearing, and the company takes a slice of the action rather than a flat fee for the equipment.
I differ with you on that. I object to automated enforcement, I like to face my accuser, and want a sworn police officer to serve any citation on me personally. I think mailing a citation to the owner of the vehicle, with no proof whatsoever that the registered owner was driving should be made illegal.
Furthermore, I think the fines for any automated enforcement system should be set at exactly $5, and 100% of that money should go to affordable housing, no money to the city, the traffic camera company, or the courts.
The fine in Fullerton is $358 by the way, I think that includes the court "penalty assessment". For automated enforcement they should have to use other, non-fine funds to pay for all that, and to pay their camera vendor.
See how quick they take those cameras out.
Steevo has it right
The first time you get one of these cursed tickets you get an immediate sense of how unjust they are. What about the constitutional right to face your accuser?
The one and only time I got one of these tickets was for going 3 miles over the speed limit in Portland and it cost me over $180. needless to say I was pacing the cars around me, so the sense being coerced by the system to cough up some baksheesh is more than disappointing.
It makes you think bad thoughts about the motives of our fine and pure elected local officials -- that are of course only motivated by the desire for the betterment of our lovely law abiding community.
I agree that automated
I agree that automated enforcement is not fair. The camera doesn't catch everything around you. You might have to barely run a red to avoid an accident due to the car behind you tailgating you, and a police officer might not give you a ticket...but the automated camera sure will.
Red Light Cam Scam
The article states, "police departments have defended the cameras, saying they reduce high-injury T-bone collisions that occur when motorists run red lights."
What about the increased number of rear end accidents. They also ticket on not stopping on a right turn on red. How is this reducing the number of "T-bone collisions?
Right on Red AFTER STOP
The article states, "police departments have defended the cameras, saying they reduce high-injury T-bone collisions that occur when motorists run red lights."
They also ticket on not stopping on a right turn on red.
Rolling - or "California" stops are not allowed in any of the written traffic laws I have seen. They all pretty much state the same thing - "permitted AFTER a full stop has been made." Rolling up to a light that has just turned red and continuing to make a right turn before the traffic gets across the intersection is breaking the law. In my county several cameras have been set up to stop this practice as many illegal turners also do not turn into the correct lane but often swing across 2 or even 3 lanes.
ɐ‾nsǝɹ Just one click away from the end of the Internet
So Cal yellow/amber lights too short
If you've ever been to So Cal, you know how short the yellow/amber lights are compared to other places. This contributes to the "trap" issue of the red light cameras. They even have them for "no right turn on red"...ouch!
I smell a over turn, down the road
You can read the whole article here:
http://tinyurl.com/5nlvuy
I would expect to see this guy get over turned, in a higher court. Unfortunately theses cams are here to stay they just make to much money for the cities.
I don't agree with them in the least, so all we can do is use the POI files that are feverishly maintained for accuracy, and then be aware of your surroundings at all times.
Using Android Based GPS.The above post and my sig reflects my own opinions, expressed for the purpose of informing or inspiring, not commanding. Naturally, you are free to reject or embrace whatever you read.
Like the NRA?
People should organize get some money and go after the cops who are supposed to protect and serve us. Have you noticed they don't protect and server anymore? Rather they intimidate and prey upon us all in the "name of _ fill in the blank with some bull crap here".
This is all about the money - that's it! Stealing from people who work for a living and can barely get by let alone fight a friggin ticket.
-- markbrown
Interesting hot button
Interesting hot button topic, eh? As an ex-Californian, I've stayed interested through the years on how the"property tax" revolution affected life in general. Most everyone loved having their property taxes cut, but it seemed that all that it really did was shift the revenue gathering elsewhere. So now a goverment (state, city, county) will do anything to gather a buck and now there are red-light and speeding cameras to go along with radar and lidar and traffic planes and...
I'd tend to agree with markbrown that it hits those who "work for a living" the hardest. Here in Washington the traffic ticket lawyers are a slam dunk to get out of a ticket but you end up paying them instead of the state (city, county, etc). If you got the bucks to buy a high-end vehicle, you definitely have the bucks for the lawyer. On the flip-side, if you don't have a habit of rolling red lights or speeding, it's not really a problem. Don't think that I'm above speeding or don't roll the occasional red, but if you play, sometimes you gotta pay...
I most definitely see myself downloading the red light and speed cameras POI. It's just like buying a radar detector...if you didn't do anything wrong, why would you need it?
Right on Red After Stop
I once explained to a co-worker that you can make a right on red after a full and complete stop, when nobody is coming across you and she thought I was crazy. She said a right on red is just that, no need to stop or look for traffic.
People in my neighborhood don't even slow down for a right on red.
Right on .... red
I once explained to a co-worker that you can make a right on red after a full and complete stop, when nobody is coming across you and she thought I was crazy. She said a right on red is just that, no need to stop or look for traffic.
People in my neighborhood don't even slow down for a right on red.
Which is why there are so many cameras set up to catch these uniformed members of society.
ɐ‾nsǝɹ Just one click away from the end of the Internet
Teens spoof speed cameras
Look at this link for a interesting story about teens putting fake license plates on cars and then speeding through cameras to get tickets sent to the wrong person.
hmmm....
http://www.thesentinel.com/302730670790449.php
Hey Mark Brown
If the police don’t Protect and Serve.
When your home gets burglarized or your car gets stolen or worse Hijacked, Who you going to call?
"Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty and well-preserved body, but rather to skid in broadside, thoroughly used up, totally worn out, and loudly proclaiming---WOW!! WHAT A RIDE!!!" Member 2854
Not the Chicago Police
When we lived in the city and were burglarized, they said that unless the dollar value was above a certain amount(we were newlyweds and didn't have "stuff") they wouldn't even come out. If we wanted a police report for insurance, we'd have to go to the station because they were too busy.
Same city - within six months of that - my car was parked (yes - legally) along the street, when a taxi cab driver decided to squeeze between the line of traffic, and my car and several other cars while trying to make an additional lane for just himself. He sideswiped more than one car and kept going, making it a hit and run. The same police department wouldn't do anything further than to fill out a report - even though SEVERAL witnesses stayed to offer their services because, as it turned out - Chicago Taxi Drivers aren't liked that much. Police wouldn't take any of their information because they weren't involved in the accidents... By the way - the Taxi Cab Driver was uninsured, as was the cab company he drove for as was later found out by my insurance company. (because the witnesses all gave me their statements and contact information which I forwarded to the insurance company, driver description, car license plate, company, etc...)
That said - Not the Chicago Police Department.
Any other department in the suburbs - yep, in a heartbeat. I am amazed at the amount of assistance and help that I've seen many of them provide.
And now, back to your regularly scheduled forum - already in progress . . .