The trouble with speed cameras.....

Edit: Post deleted. Misread post.

Yup they got video also. So when you get the still in the mail you can figure on the video to back them up if you get in their face and proclaim your innocence .

I don't know that is provable.

Nothing is really provable. What are you supposed to do, get expert witnesses to testify as to the functioning of the speed sensors, and the ticket camera vendor has their own?

The whole thing stinks to high heaven.

The government is counting on people just paying the fine rather than try to fight it. How would I know if the speed camera was wrong? With all devices that measure, eventually the device will need to be checked and calibrated for accuracy. I do not think they are going to issue any refunds if they find out the speed camera was wrong.

I think you can go to court and claim guilty, but with an explanation.
I wonder if anyone has brought in hospital records showing he was taking pregnant wife or kidney stoned person to the hospital as an excuse to push the speed.

Video. Most are TIMED still photos with flash. I don't think they are capable of making a video.

I have heard they provided you a link so you can check the video.

Most if not all of these systems now have a video camera in addition to the still camera.

However a speed camera, where they are accusing you of driving at a particular speed as measured by their computerized sensors, well, I can't see what showing you video would prove.

It sure can't prove a particular speed.

It's just not the same as a video of a red light camera. Now, that can show you violating the law.

A speed camera video, that just shows you (or someone in your car, not necessarily *you*) drove by that day.

The still image shows it was your vehicle that went through the trap at the time the sensors in that lane picked up a vehicle passing through the trap at excessive speed. (The ground sensor calculates your speed)

The radar is calibrated and must be certified to be reading speeds accurately. (So, it also reads your speed)

The video is complimentary data. You can easily calculate the the actual speed of the car by the distance it travels in a specific time interval.

The data they have that shows you were speeding is double or triple redundant and thus can be harder to fight than just an officer using a radar gun if they choose to use the video as additional evidence.

The problem I find with these cameras is the fact that there may be extenuating circumstances for your speeding or red light running that the camera can't verify.. or that may NOT be believed.

That's one of my main reasons why I'm totally against their use.

Nuvi1300WTGPS

You think they have sensors buried in the lane? Have you any evidence of that?

I think it's highly unlikely that they put any lane sensors under the pavement at all, at least on those freeway cameras in Phoenix. Too expensive, by far.

As to the idea you could calculate your speed by the time of your travel in the video:

Based on the position of the cameras and the fact they are situated to be able to photograph you for about 1 second as you pass, that seems highly unlikely.

They just *can't* have more than 100' of video, clearly inadequate for any calculation of your speed.

I'm in Canada, but the outfit that runs the traffic light/speed cameras is from the US. The system isn't in use everywhere, but it is fairly common across North America.

We have sensors buried in the road a precise distance apart. Speed is calculated by the time it takes a vehicle to travel over both of them.. (Speed is time & distance) The link below describes how they work..

http://www.winnipeg.ca/police/safestreets/is_camera_tech.stm

That's a diagram of an intersection safety camera.
Not a speed camera measuring the speed on a freeway.

I suspect it would cost millions of dollars to bury sensors in freeways. Much more than on a city street.

They have hundreds of those cameras on freeways in Arizona. They just couldn't bury sensors. They are run by Redflex Traffic Systems of Australia, by the way. Their US operation is based in Scottsdale.

They also have Ford Escape Hybrids they park temporarily on the side of the roads, I saw a number of those.

Clearly there is no way any part of a mobile speed trap could be anywhere except in the car.

Arizona DPS Statement of Technology.

http://www.azdps.gov/Services/Photo_Enforcement/Documents/PE...

I think you are just a little naive of just how simple a calculation this really is.

You can easily calculate the speed by measuring the distance between as little as between 2 frames of the video. At 75mph you move 110 feet each second. In a video at 30 frames per second you'll move 3.66 feet in each frame. At 45 mph, 2.2 feet in that 1/30th per second. Given an entire second of video? In a precisely measured and marked trap, it would take no effort to be able to tell your speed to precision to better than 1/10 mph.

I haven't looked into the video rate of their cameras. If the frame rate is higher, the precision goes up even more, but of course there is no reason to be that precise if they give you an 11 mph grace. In that case just 1 mph is more than enough precision.

I second that.... I just got one in the mail last week here in Phoenix (going 67 mph right when entering freeway on ramp to merge into traffic flow - unreasonable in my opinion), and yes, there is indeed a sensor or stretch of freeway that times you then activates the camera (they even include a diagram showing how the technology works, including the sensor zone on freeway).

Ya know, at intersections there used to be sensor loops. But not too much anymore. Cars are sensed by those cameras up high pointing down at the traffic.

They don't take any pictures, those little cameras pointing down. They are there to replace the loops under the streets. Cheaper. I called the city traffic engineer and that's what he said.

I guess tearing up the streets and embedding sensors is a comparatively big deal. So it seems putting sensors under a busy urban freeway would be doubly so.

Though never happy getting any ticket, in the mail or from a police officer, it's kind of hard to argue the accuracy of the technology. Unlike the radar guns held by a person, the cameras are set at specific angles and heights... these things don't vary, and they allow simple calculation of speed. Unfortunately.

Can always argue extenuating circumstances, just hard to argue innocence.

Steevo, I think the stretch of freeway that is the timing zone refers to the stretch where the timing starts and stops, regardless of whether it is camera sensors or in-road sensors, etc. They are just saying that there is a section of the road that is monitored or timed, regardless of the exact method.

I don't plan on arguing that I was going 67 mph for a moment (when the flash went off I remember looking down and seeing approx. 65) but the fact that many of the freeways limit are 65 mph anyway and I had just merged onto traffic to be in the flow of traffic seems reasonable to me. Plus, the ticket fine is exorbitant.

The technology has always been suspect. There are a number of cases where the wrong car has been ticketed. In some cases, tickets were issued to parked cars that happened to be in view of the camera.

I remember when the in-road sensors were put in on eastbound I-10 from about 35th Avenue to the 101. The Interstate was shut down for two nights on a weekend as they installed the loops.

As you are driving on the interstates in Phoenix pay attention to the loops in the road adjacent to the fixed speed cameras - those loops are actuating the cameras. The mobile speed camera units (Ford Escapes) use a weak Ka-band radar signal so that radar detector users do not have too much of a warning.

Yes, cities do use camera systems to actuate traffic signals since they are less expensive to maintain. In the past, I've designed intersections and traffic signal plans with loops or cameras, depending on what the Owner wants.

Really? I mean... how do they determine your wheelbase? Gotta know that if they're going to calculate your speed.

Certainly not using two separated sensors... how would they determine if you or another car changed lanes between them...

And radar, manned or not, has it's flaws too.

I've been stopped and successfully demonstrated to the officer that his gun is only accurately marking my motorcycle if there is no vehicle behind me overtaking me.

The same is true of those "advisory" radar trailers and warning signage. They accurately reflect my speed so long as I'm the only one in sight...

At least... that's my story and I'm sticking to it.

Got nailed by speed camera ,,got the notice but not paying they have to prove you got it in the mail,,as long as you don't go into the webb to look they can't prove a thing.

How about if you hire a lawyer to defend you, the lawyer takes your ticket, goes on the website, reviews the video and tells you to forget it?

Can they prove you saw it on the web in that case?

That someone looks at the "evidence" online does *not* prove you saw it. And that is *not* acceptance of service.

They have to serve you in person.

When these autonomous traps were first being introduced, I believe there were cases challenging it because it was in conflict with the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution.

These crafty politicians said, since the driver cannot be identified we are going to hold the vehicle owner responsible. Since an individual cannot be charge of anything we don't need the Sixth Amendment. Just send in the payment...

I'm no lawyer, but you get the jist...

you just said it, your car drove by and got flashed and that's the law. If you don't like it then don't lend your car to a irresponsible driver. They don't ticket the driver, rather the owner of the auto by now we all know that.

My wife drives her car and I drive mine, and no one else drives either of them. if you have kids that something you have to have worked out ahead of time before letting them drive. If you have a company car you have to run a log of who was driving at the time the ticket was issued and dock the tick payment from his or her pay.

You are facing your accuser, Film and Video, it doesn't get any better than that for evidence!

No, they do not need to know wheelbase length.

They only need to figure out the speed of ONE part of the vehicle. I.E. the front bumper, one of the axles, etc. It's not like vehicles expand and contract as they move along. ALL parts of a vehicle are traveling at the same speed...therefore...only the speed of ONE part is needed and, this is easily measured and, subsequently, computed. Vehicle length (wheelbase) is inconsequential.

The length of the embedded speed sensor is fixed and previously known...it never changes. There are two "gates"...a start gate at the beginning and a stop gate at the end of the sensor, usually magnetically activated. The first detected part of the vehicle at the "entrance" over the speed sensor WILL be the first part detected over the "exit" of the sensor. R x T = D after that. (D)istance is known (length of sensor) and (T)ime is known ("stop watch" timing from "front" to "end" of sensor trigger). (R)ate, aka speed, is a simple division of distance (known sensor length) by time (measured part of vehicle spent over the sensor).

There ya go...

You're really quick to give up your rights!

None of that is true.

If you only drive your wife's car and she only drives your car, you can safely ignore the Arizona speed camera tickets. If a ticket comes in the mail and it's not a picture of you, well, they would have to serve you. You could go to court and say "it's not a picture of me."

If you have a car in a company name you can safely ignore those tickets as well. They don't ticket the car, only the driver. Unfortunately they have no way of knowing whom that is.

You don't have to testify against another person by mail. You don't have to keep any log as to whom was driving.

That is all unnecessary and illegal.

Cincinnati just got a speed camera in a vehicle so it can move from place to place. The tickets are mailed from a company in Arizona. Think I'll stay on the KY side of the river.

Keep ignoring the tickets and lets see what happens. I will willing to bet you won't get away with it for very long. So go ahead and beak the law.. because you only think your getting away with it. They have photo/video evidence of the infraction, You have nothing but a lame excuse they have heard thousands of times before you!

If your unemployed it makes sense to go fight it or if you work at minimum wage, but if your a serious wage earner you either pay the ticket or a day of missed work, either is expensive and you lose. So slow down, stop on red and there will be no problem.

The Traffic enforcement laws themselves are toothless, but read on.

Cleveland can't block registrations to pry money from violators. It can't impound a car simply because of a clicked ticket. (A word of caution, though: An unpaid parking ticket provides the city some muscle. Any combination of five or more past-due parking and photo-generated citations allows a tow truck to haul off and hold an offender's vehicle until the bill gets settled.)

quick to give up your rights? Now that's really funny!

Please don't ever run for public office. With your laissez faire attitude we don't need you voting on any laws, especially in Arizona.

The Arizona speed cameras are civil. Not criminal or even an infraction. No license points.

Widely considered illegal.

I posted articles and interviews with attorneys in the state of Arizona who said what the law is and what you need to do if you get one of those particular tickets in that state.

Clearly you don't have any idea about the subject of this thread.

Perhaps enforcement cameras in Cleveland are not like the ones on the freeways in Arizona.

I live in California, and the ones in California are not like the ones in Arizona. The Arizona ones are different legally. They had to be, since they are mailing out the tickets first class.

This has all been discussed here in the past. It's fine to have an opinion but please read some of the previous discussions.

The citizens of Cincinnati wisely banned red light and speed cameras a couple of years ago by putting it on the ballot and voting on it. I believe the camera you are talking about is in Hamilton, Ohio which is a little north of Cincinnati. I think I will be avoiding Hamilton myself.

If this subject has been discussed here in the past, why did you start a new thread?
No only have I read the other threads but have made posts in many of them. So I suggest you be the one that reads the forum threads.

Now back to the subject at hand.
Here is a case in point of a guy in Arizona that believes he is above the law, and it about to make payment.

A case in point

Vontesmar, a flight attendant, chose to inform the DPS that he was not driving when confronted with the 37 violations at his job three weeks ago. DPS officials estimate the car registered in Vontesmar's name was caught by cameras more than 90 times, but time had lapsed on the majority of violations by the time officers tracked Vontesmar down.

Vontesmar is confident that he won't have to pay the fines, an amount that could exceed $6,500.

"It's obviously a revenue grab," he said of the program. "They're required by law to ID the driver of the vehicle. If they can't identify the driver or the vehicle by the picture, what are they doing to identify the driver?"

Typically, the DPS uses driver's-license photos and vehicle registration to confirm the identity of motorists, but there is a special unit assigned to go after frequent fliers.

In this case, officers sat outside Vontesmar's home and watched him drive to work. "We watched him four different times put the monkey mask on and put the giraffe-style mask on," Officer Dave Porter said. "Based on surveillance, we were positive that Vontesmar was the driver."

Porter said that it would be up to justices of the peace to determine what to do with Vontesmar's tickets, but the officer said there is enough evidence to reissue the tickets in Vontesmar's name, despite his claims that he was not the driver.

Some frequent speeders cover their faces, use post-office boxes or fictitious addresses to beat the system, said Officer Jeff Hawkins, who is working 50 such cases.

"They generally do it under the pretext that they're not going to be caught," he said. "These are what you probably consider as people who don't really respect the law at all."

BTW:
I don't plan on running for office, But thanks for your debate! And as we all know it is a money grab, however it is the law and if you break it you end up paying, one way or another.

bumped

Oh sure, a guy with a monkey mask? That's not what we're talking about, sure, after 90 tickets they are gonna make an example of him.

Even for a civil matter. They have to get him. He lives in Arizona, too.

But I live in California. It's a much bigger deal for the Redflex company to serve me for a civil matter like those tickets. They just don't do it. Or not for one of those citations. I am pretty sure if I had 90 of them they would sure try.

You may as well give up your fight Steevo. 30 or so years ago, various governments began to legislate against smoking, for the common good. They got away with it. Since then more and more laws are being passed, again for the common good, inhibiting or outright banning whatever the politicians think will curry the favour of the voters.
The battle, for individual rights, was fought and lost without a whimper. Rather, the loss was celebrated as a great victory. Now, the-powers-that-be are picking us off, one group at a time. We have no individual rights, only privileges, that may be withdrawn at any time.

Wow, you are so jaded.

I disagree.

We still have individual rights, while there is a constant cry nowadays for kind of rights the founders left completely out of the constitution: Group rights.

Rights because you are part of a minority group, be it racial, gender, Sunday drivers, or some other perceived group.

One of those rights, to get back on topic, is the right to confront your accuser. It's right there in the 6th amendment.

Those Arizona speed cameras are a civil matter. Why? They can't serve you. They don't much want to see you in court! Too dangerous for them since their citations in Arizona are widely considered to be illegal.

So the citation you receive in the mail (in Arizona) is worded very carefully. I have one here, by the way from a year ago, but it wasn't me driving. I responded, sent them a letter and asked a number of questions. No answer. I didn't really expect one.

I do still have to get the California DMV to stop sending information to Redflex, that's just illegal in California. We have DMV privacy laws, and the State of Arizona gave Redflex access to the California DMV records. Those records can only be given out to government agencies, police, courts. Not contractors.

Well, I certainly complain frequently about our law makers in VT. After reading this topic I'm glad speed cameras would never make it here this century !!!

Jaded:-
"–adjective
1.dulled or satiated by overindulgence: a jaded appetite.
2.worn out or wearied, as by overwork or overuse.
3.dissipated: a jaded reprobate."

Well, I could be accused of being any of the above at various times. However, I don't think any are applicable to my post. Certainly cynical, may be an appropriate definition. Some may even agree with me.

Your post asserts that you do have rights, but then it also seems to indicate that the governments are not complying with them. Doesn't that prove my point?

I have been nailed 4 times by cameras here in MD. I think most people drive above the limit and the cameras temporarily make you aware of your speed and surroundings for cameras. They are money makers for all involved, the state probably loves them. The only positive for me is that I don't acquire points usually associated with the violation.

Under MD law, you have to be exceeding the posted speed limit by 12 MPH to get a ticket. That means you weren't just a little over, but quite a bit over the posted limit.

In my case last month of receiving a speed camera ticket by mail for temporarily merging onto the freeway up to 67mph (when the freeways here are both 55 and 65 limits), what is the best action? I find it to be very unreasonable; temporary, slight speeding to merge into traffic seems normal, especially on a freeway.

I had already sent in my first response saying I contest it (unfortunately, before everyone told me to ignore it). Now they sent a second one that is basically the same, but I called them and they said it is like a follow-up to make sure I wanted to contest it. Since they got my first response I don't think I need to respond again, do I?

Also, once you send in the response I'm assuming you can no longer ignore it completely, at least if I get a court date. If I don't, I see no need to respond further as we both have proof I already did.

How do these hearings go with camera violations? Do they reason at all or is there a judge or what? In my case I find it to be unreasonable, but do they automatically just go by the camera and say if technically you reached that speed, even momentarily, you are guilty? Do they take into account the circumstances and throw out minor instances such as these, and just send the citation in hopes some will respond and gain the revenue?

The situation is different. Evidently there was a camera at an on ramp. MD does not put cameras near exit and entrance ramps. The only speed camera locations allowed are in school and construction zones.

Different state, different laws.

It wasn't on the on-ramp per se. I said I just merged from the on ramp into the flow of traffic and it was right before the next exit (they're only a mile apart).

Your the Jaded person, your car got caught caught, if you want to face your accuser contest the ticket,drive back and go in front of the camera referee . You will be shown your car speeding on a still and video with the MPH on it more that you would get from a cop.
Your problem is you feel your above the law, and guess what your not. Just pay the ticket in Arizona and quit whining it's over a year old now, and remember not to loan your car to that person you say was driving your car.

BTW: you haven't said what state you practice law in yet!

but I really don't have a huge problem with speed cameras. Whether driving absent mindedly or intentionally speeding, too many drivers are taking my life into their hands and they don’t have that right. I do think red light cameras add a level of danger (from someone stopping abruptly or unnecessarily) rather than eliminate danger. I lived in Phoenix for two years and saw more close-calls because of abrupt stopping than from running a light. I'm sure someone will have statistics to refute that, though.

So you were already into traffic when they flashed you at 67mph, I guess they gotcha, open your check book or contest and get added court costs it your choice. Remember it will also probably cost you a day off work as well.

So by becoming a responsible driver and staying within the speed limit even when on the approach ramp, or merging into traffic. limit you save money, frustration and time!

Actually, you DO get to face your accuser in court. It will be a representative of the municipal or state government that issued the ticket, and possibly a technician from the company that operates and maintains the cameras.

The photo or video is merely EVIDENCE. Like all evidence, a photo or video can be contested in court as to it's admissability, it's accuracy, and it's validity. THAT is how lawyers make their living!

If you think governments and camera companies are using speed and red light cameras as cash cows, ask your lawyer how much he or she will get paid assisting you in court.

I know from reading various threads that you support speed cameras and admitting guilt no matter what, but I do not think that merging into traffic at 65 (the speed limit for most freeways here) deserves a $200 ticket; I had just gotten on. Years ago I got a speeding ticket and paid it as I felt it was just. This does not feel just, especially for that fee amount. I'm in the camp that with automated systems that can't evaluate conditions, there will always be unreasonable citations that even a police officer would not cite you for.

In Washington, you cannot renew your car tab.

Actually I think the cameras have to go also, I would much rather see police employed and hired to do the job. Just so we get that straight.

However I am one that believes in obeying the laws and if the speed limit is 60 and you got snapped at 67. you broke the law. would a police officer had given you a break, we will never know for sure.

Since you got snapped at 67 just pay the ticket and move on. then be the person that starts the grassroots group to help remove the cameras and hire police instead. Somebody has to do it.

So it's the technology I believe in, and how it helps make responsible drivers.