Red Light Cameras Unconstitutional

If you get a RLC ticket you are not being charged with a crime. Who was driving the vehicle isn't even a question. I guess you could go to court, admit it was you and upon your sworn statement have a police officer write you a ticket and then ask for a trial.

...if they are unconstitutional.

If I remember my civics correctly, only the Supreme Court can decide if something is unconstitutional.

In order to get them to make a decision,

- someone has to be 'injured' by the law.

- the case has to be tried in a judicial court and appealed all the way to a federal district court.

- the Supreme Court has to decide to hear the appeal.

I don't see that happening here.

One can hope...

Since this thread has devolved into a political back and forth, we have decided to moderate by unpublishing off topic comments.

We will keep the thread opened for those who have something helpful to share with the community regarding the legal aspects of this topic.

~Angela

http://www.poi-factory.com/node/28855

I watch the walk signals, the traffic signal turns yellow as soon as the walk stops flashing. The walks that show the count down time are the best.

I for one do not like the count down signal for a few years ago as a tourist in Turkey I was introduced to this signal.
Evidently they had this signal for a while for once the signal hit one and you had not already started through the intersection you had umpteen cars behind you honking at you to get going.
If one remembers that when right turn on red was introduced that people actually stopped but now its a maybe.
To many people will be watching the countdown and not the green/red light and inviting crashes.
Then we will need cameras that check when you started through the intersection.

Camera footage is already acceptable in court. Many a criminal has been convicted by Surveillance Camera photos.

I think the method of issuing the ticket/summons is the question. If the camera company sends the ticket, that's questionable. If a Police Officer reviews the film and issuses the ticket, that will probably hold up.

I don't care one way or another about the cameras being there. I usually stop completely for a right turn on red anyway. And I always stop just behind the stop line whether turning or not, as there are usually sensors there to change the light. I don't know how many times I have seen someone making a left turn and they are in front of the stopline and the light will cycle for everyone else and not them. Then they wind up giving up and running the red light. I have stopped a few times and told people to back up over the sensor behind the line so the light will change. I did notice that in Canada that the loops extend quite a ways beyond the stop line, since you can't see it with snow on the road.

Very interesting.

No, it means that you can't enter that intersection. You are perfectly free to continue to roll as long as you don't enter that intersection until the light is green.

Sorry, already covered.

Fingers crossed

I would have no problem with RLCs if they were just honest about them. Admit they are more about generating revenue then safety. The four second yellow should have to be periodically confirmed at all intersections with RLCs.

Unfortunately not many exist today.

I see nothing wrong with red light cameras or speeding cameras for any revenue made from them is by idiots who failed to notice the signs telling you that they exist.
Since their innovation people have been screaming about radar units in possession of police officers and how they hide and catch unsuspecting people. At least the radar guns with cameras tell you that they are there where as the police can sneak up on you. Either way you are guilty and just pay the fine unless you can prove to the judge that "It ain't me "

Amen brother!!!!

I once drove forward in center lane from a Red light stop to allow a path to clear for a fire engine at a clogged intersection

I read an article recently , that the number of rear end accidents has gone up significantly in the past few years.
The red light cams are forcing people to jam on their brakes.

I was recently run into the back of my truck when I stoped at a stop sign. The girl driving said nobody ever stops here why did you. Like it was my fault that I stoped at the stop sign.

Welcome to the site.

Since you are new, you may want to do a couple of the Beginner Exercises.

To make it easy, when you click on the first link below, hold down the "Cntl" key as you left-click. That will open a new "Tab" in your browser in the "Tab" bar. Click on that 'Tab" to do the first exercise - leaving the "Tab" you are now reading open and available to click on and return here.

The first link makes sure settings on your computer are such that you can do more advanced POI loading.
http://www.poi-factory.com/node/30393

This next link helps you get a backup by attaching your GPS to your computer. (NEVER do anything to your GPS until you have a backup)
http://www.poi-factory.com/node/30394

After you do the exercises, I have a question. Did this article you read attribute rear end collisions to cameras?

The way people drive around here, about half the people are priviledged (or so they think) to do anything they want without regard for anyone else. In MY OPINION, we need more police out there enforcing the traffic laws.

The way people drive around here, about half are priviledged (or so they think) to do whatever they want without regard for anyone else.

I agree with the earlier posts about following a truck. If you are so close that you can't see the lights, then you're too close. Back off.

Simply a revenue producing product. I wonder how many rear end collisions have been caused by these taxing cameras. The real money these contraptions generate comes from right turn on red, which is almost never a safety issue. No common sense perspective from a live person. Turn right on red at 1 or 2 mph. BAM $100 revenue boost to the village. Ask me how I know, or ask my daughter.

They were deemed to be in violation of the Alabama constitution, which states a law enforcement officer must witness the offense. However, Montgomery and other cities have made these civil actions, rather than moving violations. The fines are less than half of the fine you'd have if a police officer cited you and if you don't pay or appeal (you can request a hearing to dispute the "ticket"), the city will file a civil suit against you (not sure what basis they have found for the suit). The "violation" does not go against your driving record, as well. I've seen several of these notices (got one myself and a number sent to my company where employees ran redlights) and they appear, for the most part, to be accurate. I questioned the one I got, but my dispute fell on deaf ears and I had to pay.

Who ever said that is pretty stupid.....

I've spent about 15 minutes looking for actual unbiased data to support this claim, and I quit as I have only seen biased reports. Could you provide facts to support this?

Why blame the cameras because they are not the cause of rear enders. The problem is the idiot who tailgates you (which is against the law) and causes the accident. Lets give blame where it really belongs.

I've driven in many places across the US and Canada, and have always stopped at every light when it turns yellow. I haven't had any issues with the tailgater that you have described, although they would certainly be to blame.

On a side note, I had someone last night honk at me in VA when I came to a full stop at a red light before turning. I'm guessing this isn't the norm?

I've read the same is true in Tennessee.

A couple of years ago, someone wrote a letter to the editor of our paper that said he as been visiting our fair city and got a RLC ticket. He stated he could not see the light because of the semi in front of him, and admitted to speeding. However, he thought that it was not in the best interest of the town to give tickets to visitors. He said he would never come back.

The next day, someone else responded to his letter. All she said was "Good!"

You are behind a 18 wheeler and know you are approaching an intersection because you can see the cross traffic. Aren't drivers smart enough to back off so you can now see over the truck? I have done that numerous times. It gets the drivers behind me annoyed and honking the horn, but at least I am not running a red light.

There is no IQ test for drivers, so to answer your question, no. (Yes, I know it was rhetorical.)

The heck with them. Let 'em blow.

Hmmmm...... I hope this doesn't "Hijack" the conversation, but there are a number of states where "radar Detectors" are illegal. If memory serves me correctly, I tend to recall a case where there were several drivers going down the road, each about a mile between each other. The first person would call the second about a speed trap. In the strictest sense of the word, this is a form of "radar detection" which violates the law. Most of these "radar detector" laws are so loosely worded any number of interpretations can be legitimately supported.

So now that the framework is set, how can the GPS's that alert folks to "Speed Cameras" (since we all know they work on "Radar") not violate the law.

Now in my particular case, I have all kinds of FCC licenses (yes radar is included) so I have reason to have radar antennas and radio transceivers in the vehicle at any given time. While I've had several state troopers attempt to remove my equipment they tend to start thinking twice when I start pulling out US Government issued FCC Licenses for Radar and a myriad of other classes.

As for RLC's and Speed Cameras being unconstitutional, I'd wonder if cameras in banks that record all people's transactions and activities while in the bank might be equally unconstitutional just in case some schmuck decides to rob the place.

Ahhh.... such a wonderful mess we've made of Orwell's 1984!

The only state in the United States that radar detectors are illegal in personal vehicles is VA plus the District of Columbia and on Military bases.
CT was the only other state in the recent past but that was repealed in 1992.

CA and MN don't allow them affixed to the windshield , I believe !

As for commercial vehicles that's another matter !

Semi's and CB radios. Been doing it for years.

Need I say "Smokey and the Bandit"!

What would happen if everyone went to one of these and stopped and didn't start again for 6 hours?

Raise the fine by 10 folds and cities can afford post a cop on every corners where there are red light cameras. I bet the cops can issue just as many tickets as the cameras can do, and probably more.

Why don't we just randomly charge drivers with exorbitant "bills" for the privilege of using roadways. We can claim it's for safety, and to pay for more officers to have drivers henpecked to death because minor infractions that don't cause any harm MUST BE PUNISHED! That's what red light cameras are doing now, so let's get to it! Oh, wait.

Non traffic offence and no points against you license.

Because having a hand in your pocket reaching for your wallet needs to be made legal, otherwise it would be unconstitutional.

Because a sworn & certified police officer did not observe you doing it.

And probably so that you cannot appeal it above the local judge and eliminate the chance that it could officially be deemed unconstitutional.

But that is just my guess.

A motorist tried to use the unconstitutional defense. Hizzoner said that traffic court is not the place where constitutionality can be argued.

What a concept!

Kind of a strange argument that because it is a camera rather than a person seeing the lawbreaker go through a red light and creating a dangerous situation for other people that it is somehow unconstitutional. Personally, I think every intersection should have a camera. However, I do believe they should standardize the times the lights are yellow and that no tickets should be given for right turns on red lights if the person slows down to at least 2 mph - eliminating the "complete stop" issue. Then what's wrong with them? Don't break the law and you won't get a ticket. We will all be safer.

If red light camera intersections were set up the way you describe, I'd have no problem with them. However, if they were, there would be no money to be made. I highly doubt those benefiting from the profits would even consider making the cameras about safety.

Need to get rid of third parties for any of this to occur. Although I have no problems with profit (I lean way right) it is not appropriate for third parties to profit from traffic tickets.

It seems to me that a third party has to profit somewhere along the line. Municipalities cannot manufacture cameras.

It also seems to me that it would be appropriate to pay to a third party a "fixed" cost for operating cameras.

No, but they could buy and operate them themselves

I guess that would be OK. It's really the kickback per ticket that I object to. The third party can profit from installing and operating the cameras, but not from the act of issuing tickets.

For passenger cars, there is just one state: Virginia. The District of Columbia also bans radar detectors.

But I still use it, as well as the laser shifters