Score One For The Good Guys: Court Rules Against Traffic Cameras...

[paulitician]

These kinds of things prove there is still hope for preserving our Freedom & Liberty. Never give up.

 

[SteadyMercury]

No, it is totally different since the tickets are issued to the car's owner and not the driver.
The owner may not have been the one driving the car, when the alleged infraction happened. This is a major problem.

Maybe the traffic cameras work differently where you live, but here they take a picture of the driver from the front and the plate from the back. The photos are reviewed and a citation is only sent if they identify the driver as registered owner by comparing with drivers license picture. I had a coworker who got one and I was pretty impressed with the quality of the picture, there was no doubt he was the one driving the car.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

See, Big Brother can lose. But you have to stand up and fight.

‘Big Brother’?

More like ‘oh, brother…’

There is no ‘big brother,’ that’s an inane, naïve, and childish concept.

This is an example of the judicial process and the relationship among the courts, government, and the people.

Lawmaking entities are entitled to enact legislation in good faith, believed to serve a public interest, in the context of sound governance. These laws are presumed to be Constitutional until a court rules otherwise. In this case government sought to deter motorists from running red lights, which can lead to accidents, injuries, and in some cases death.

The people perceived the law to be an infringement on their civil liberties, and filed suit accordingly. The court reviewed the matter in the context of existing case law and the facts of the case, and ruled that the measure was un-Constitutional.

It is therefore idiocy to infer that the government was acting in response to some nefarious motive.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

That's pretty stupid.

Already cameras are having a positive effect in terms of bringing down people who disobey traffic laws and crime in general.

Knowing that your actions are subject to audit, makes you less likely to break the law.

Red-Light Camera Backlash: Are They Causing Accidents? - ABC News

 

[SteadyMercury]

See, Big Brother can lose. But you have to stand up and fight.

‘Big Brother’?

More like ‘oh, brother…’

There is no ‘big brother,’ that’s an inane, naïve, and childish concept.

Yup.

Paulitician leans on about 3-4 keywords he throws into most posts, he's obviously seen the reference (over)used on whatever conspiracy sites he favors and was impressed by it but completely misunderstands the underlying concepts which results in usage that is nothing short of contextually retarded.

So you get him making the "big brother" reference in just about every post, anything that goes on in the world that he frowns on is big brother at work. Anyone who doesn't buy into his latest conspiracy thread is of course a goose stepper.

It is pretty entertaining to see the fool at work.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Should have Camera everywhere. If you are not committing crime, you have nothing to worry about.

In this Age of Terrorist Acts, Rights of Privacy are outdated concepts and must be discarded for the well being and safety of the People and the State.

 

[paulitician]

See, Big Brother can lose. But you have to stand up and fight.

‘Big Brother’?

More like ‘oh, brother…’

There is no ‘big brother,’ that’s an inane, naïve, and childish concept.

This is an example of the judicial process and the relationship among the courts, government, and the people.

Lawmaking entities are entitled to enact legislation in good faith, believed to serve a public interest, in the context of sound governance. These laws are presumed to be Constitutional until a court rules otherwise. In this case government sought to deter motorists from running red lights, which can lead to accidents, injuries, and in some cases death.

The people perceived the law to be an infringement on their civil liberties, and filed suit accordingly. The court reviewed the matter in the context of existing case law and the facts of the case, and ruled that the measure was un-Constitutional.

It is therefore idiocy to infer that the government was acting in response to some nefarious motive.

Well, that's what you Big Brother-Worshippers say anyway.

 

[paulitician]

See, Big Brother can lose. But you have to stand up and fight.

‘Big Brother’?

More like ‘oh, brother…’

There is no ‘big brother,’ that’s an inane, naïve, and childish concept.

Yup.

Paulitician leans on about 3-4 keywords he throws into most posts, he's obviously seen the reference (over)used on whatever conspiracy sites he favors and was impressed by it but completely misunderstands the underlying concepts which results in usage that is nothing short of contextually retarded.

So you get him making the "big brother" reference in just about every post, anything that goes on in the world that he frowns on is big brother at work. Anyone who doesn't buy into his latest conspiracy thread is of course a goose stepper.

It is pretty entertaining to see the fool at work.

Man, it really is too bad you twits are always on the wrong side of Freedom & Liberty. You guys need to seriously reconsider your Authority-Worship.

 

[hortysir]

“To me it’s un-American — you are guilty until proven innocent vs. innocent until proven guilty,” Maag said.

I don't understand the guy's logic, these cameras are no different than other civil violations where you can choose to agree to the fine or have your day before the judge to present your case.

Is Maag also against things like parking tickets? We trust the technology of the meter to alert on an infraction, and a citation is issued with an assumption of an acceptance of violation but the offender has the right to contest in court if they choose.

No, it is totally different since the tickets are issued to the car's owner and not the driver.
The owner may not have been the one driving the car, when the alleged infraction happened. This is a major problem.
The other thing to note is that a few cities where the cameras have been installed have shortened the length of the yellow light specifically to issue more citations.

Got mine in the mail, yesterday.

Our truck is in both of our names, but my wife's name is listed first so the ticket was in her name.
Now, she can file an affidavit stating that the truck was in my "care, custody or control". They will re-send the ticket to me.
That will add court costs on top of the ticket. So, instead of $158 it becomes $238!!!!!
(no points are assessed)Thank GOD!!!
My wife has never gotten a ticket and she is LIVID that this is attached to her name.

Let's say that there were flowers involved, when I came home last night!


Now......as to my thoughts on the merits of this blatantly FASCIST practice??


You can't convince me of the savings, Sallow, unless you can also factor in the number of rear-end collisions caused by people slamming on their brakes at intersections with the shortest yellow light in the county.

Find it strange that some of the posters that are okay with this government spying protested so hard against the Patriot Act.

 

[tjvh]

It's obvious the cameras can not distinguish between the operator of the motor vehicle, and the vehicle's owner. The plate which gets ticketed is the owner of the vehicle, when the owner loans his vehicle to a relative and the relative causes the infraction, it is unconstitutional to charge the owner with any wrongdoing. It's about time these fraudulent money grabs are getting scrutinized.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Another judge takes a bribe from the auto industry. The industry wants more car crashes. Car crashes mean car sales.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[

Man, it really is too bad you twits are always on the wrong side of Freedom & Liberty. You guys need to seriously reconsider your Authority-Worship.

And you need to stop being a criminal coddler. Red light runners and speeders are killers and maimers and i say make them pay.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

That's pretty stupid.

Already cameras are having a positive effect in terms of bringing down people who disobey traffic laws and crime in general.

Knowing that your actions are subject to audit, makes you less likely to break the law.

House to house searches without a warrant would be a great deterrent to drug abuse.

Do you support that?

HAHAHA. So now the loony libertarians tell us taking a pic of someone's license plate is the same as searching their house!! HAHA

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

Got mine in the mail, yesterday.

Our truck is in both of our names, but my wife's name is listed first so the ticket was in her name.
Now, she can file an affidavit stating that the truck was in my "care, custody or control". They will re-send the ticket to me.
That will add court costs on top of the ticket. So, instead of $158 it becomes $238!!!!!
(no points are assessed)Thank GOD!!!
My wife has never gotten a ticket and she is LIVID that this is attached to her name.

I've had two tickets from traffic cameras, one in Maryland when I stopped to eat on my way to visit family in Boston and one in Cleveland when I was there on business. I've never paid either one. They can't attach points to your license. All they can do is send it to a collection's agency if you don't pay. Really, you should just pay the $158 (assuming you're going to pay it). It won't go on your wife's driving record.

Also, that they would add $80 in court costs just to get the fine sent to the correct person I'm willing to bet is illegal. If you wanted to challenge that in court I bet you could get it struck down. I guess it depends whether or not you think it's worth it.

 

[hortysir]

Got mine in the mail, yesterday.

Our truck is in both of our names, but my wife's name is listed first so the ticket was in her name.
Now, she can file an affidavit stating that the truck was in my "care, custody or control". They will re-send the ticket to me.
That will add court costs on top of the ticket. So, instead of $158 it becomes $238!!!!!
(no points are assessed)Thank GOD!!!
My wife has never gotten a ticket and she is LIVID that this is attached to her name.

I've had two tickets from traffic cameras, one in Maryland when I stopped to eat on my way to visit family in Boston and one in Cleveland when I was there on business. I've never paid either one. They can't attach points to your license. All they can do is send it to a collection's agency if you don't pay. Really, you should just pay the $158 (assuming you're going to pay it). It won't go on your wife's driving record.

Also, that they would add $80 in court costs just to get the fine sent to the correct person I'm willing to bet is illegal. If you wanted to challenge that in court I bet you could get it struck down. I guess it depends whether or not you think it's worth it.

Yea, we'll just pay it.
I did run it....even if just barely, but I pay for my mistakes.

Hey, it's good for "free enterprise", right?!
I hear the camera company gets somewhere around 40%

 

[paulitician]

Another judge takes a bribe from the auto industry. The industry wants more car crashes. Car crashes mean car sales.

 

[paulitician]

It's obvious the cameras can not distinguish between the operator of the motor vehicle, and the vehicle's owner. The plate which gets ticketed is the owner of the vehicle, when the owner loans his vehicle to a relative and the relative causes the infraction, it is unconstitutional to charge the owner with any wrongdoing. It's about time these fraudulent money grabs are getting scrutinized.

Well said. Thanks.

 

[paulitician]

That's pretty stupid.

Already cameras are having a positive effect in terms of bringing down people who disobey traffic laws and crime in general.

Knowing that your actions are subject to audit, makes you less likely to break the law.

House to house searches without a warrant would be a great deterrent to drug abuse.

Do you support that?

HAHAHA. So now the loony libertarians tell us taking a pic of someone's license plate is the same as searching their house!! HAHA

Maybe you should stop your Boot-Licking and start thinking more? Just a suggestion anyway. Good luck with that.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

It's obvious the cameras can not distinguish between the operator of the motor vehicle, and the vehicle's owner. The plate which gets ticketed is the owner of the vehicle, when the owner loans his vehicle to a relative and the relative causes the infraction, it is unconstitutional to charge the owner with any wrongdoing. It's about time these fraudulent money grabs are getting scrutinized.

Are you opposed to parking tickets also?

 

[Desperado]

It's obvious the cameras can not distinguish between the operator of the motor vehicle, and the vehicle's owner. The plate which gets ticketed is the owner of the vehicle, when the owner loans his vehicle to a relative and the relative causes the infraction, it is unconstitutional to charge the owner with any wrongdoing. It's about time these fraudulent money grabs are getting scrutinized.

Are you opposed to parking tickets also?

parking tickets are not considered moving violations and there are no points against your driver's license.