Do Red-Light cams show the light red as well as license plate photo?
in [Motorcycles]
|
Prev: Congratulations, Paul Milligan
Next: Yamaha batteries
From: Timberwoof on 22 Feb 2007 16:34 In article <ZtmDh.227$M65.170(a)newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>, "Bill" <you.gotta(a)be.kidding> wrote: > "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2001(a)yahoo.com> wrote in > message news:Xns98DED37715599riemann1850yahoocom(a)207.217.125.201... > > "Doc" <docsavage20(a)yahoo.com> wrote in news:1172104813.013364.273130 > > @h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: > > > >> The issue of red-light cams has come up in Florida. An article in > >> today's paper doesn't seem to indicate that there's any method to > >> prove that the light was actually red when the car went through the > >> intersection - such as a second photo showing your vehicle in the > >> intersection and the light. > >> > >> In states where these systems are in place, do they include any such > >> evidence to verify the red light or is it simply assumed that the > >> system is perfect, that the photo of your plate was taken properly and > >> that of course you were in violation? > >> > > > > Oh stop whining you big baby. If these RLC are so faulty, then why have i > > NEVER been nabbed by one?? In any city i lived in?? Just obey the law and > > don't run red lights and you won't have any problem. > > > > I received a red light camera ticket in the mail yesterday. The car was in > the shop at the time, so obviously I wasn't the driver. But the city > ordinance makes me financially responsible as the owner, regardless. I'll > probably get the $75 out of the repair shop, but even if I do I have to > waste the time. And if they won't pay, I'm screwed. > > Now tell me this is about safety and not revenue. > > - B Do these tickets cost points on your license? That will be even more expensive. -- Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com "Like this cup," the master daid, "you are full of your own opinions and speculations. How can I show you anything unless you first empty your cup?"
From: BTR1701 on 22 Feb 2007 19:12 In article <1172116553.714713.196110(a)t69g2000cwt.googlegroups.com>, "Tim Kreitz" <timkreitz(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Feb 21, 9:47 pm, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" > <xeton2...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > Oh stop whining you big baby. If these RLC are so faulty, then why have i > > NEVER been nabbed by one?? In any city i lived in?? Just obey the law and > > don't run red lights and you won't have any problem. > > What an uninformed Yes Man for Big Brother you are. Here are just a > few articles on the dangers and problems these types of surveillance > systems create: > > 1. Fatalities rise in speed camera hotspots - "The UK government > recently suspended the deployment of more speed cameras pending the > outcome of of a University College London probe into whether they > actually save lives...56,247 tickets were issued although this had > little effect on safety, with an 18 per cent increase in road deaths." Yep. In Washington DC it was recently reported that the accident rate along one stretch of New York Avenue where a speed camera has been operating has increased since the camera was installed, not decreased. The reason? Because all the commuters who drive the route daily know about the camera and routinely hit their brakes as soon as they get to that stretch of road. And the other drivers who don't know about the camera are suddenly caught by surprise as traffic speed drops 20 MPH and accidents ensue. Faced with the almost indisputable evidence that the camera is making things more dangerous for drivers and not less, the Washington DC government, not surprisingly, chose to do nothing and leave the camera in place. Why? Because the camera generates millions of dollars in revenue per year for the city and that's the *real* reason it's there. All the talk about "safety" and "concern for children" is nothing but flowery rhetoric design to mask a crass money-grab. Another problem with the cameras (at least the way they are operated in Washington DC) is that you don't get your ticket in the mail until about a month after the violation occurs. Unlike being pulled over by an actual cop, where the mitigating factors are fresh in your mind (there are a few situations where speeding is legally justified), you now have to think back over 30 days just to try and remember why you were on that road in the first place. Also, by delaying the delivery of the ticket for a month or more, the state knows that the driver probably doesn't even realize there's a camera there and if it's a route they travel regularly, they could conceivably end up being ticketed 60 to 70 times before the first one even shows up in the mailbox. This leads to massive revenue windfalls for the government and at the same time can effectively bankrupt a person when thousands of dollars in fines suddenly drop into their mailbox all at once. And here's an interesting little news item. The Swiss have apparently made it illegal to avoid speed cameras by using a GPS database. http://www.engadget.com/2007/02/09/switzerland-bans-some-gps-devices-for- speed-camera-warnings/ This law (like so many here in the USA) has absolutely nothing to do with "safety". It's the state trying to keep people from threatening the flow of revenue. The Swiss are actually preventing people from recognizing a low speed zone, apparently hoping that drivers will continue to speed in order to pull them over and fine them. So if the Swiss are punishing people for merely identifying camera monitored areas, will it soon be illegal to speak to someone regarding these areas too? Back when I was in college in Austin, Texas, the State Police used to have a favorite spot along the highway, screened by some trees, to sit in their cruisers and pick off speeders one at a time. One day, a couple of college students decided to stand on the side of the road about a mile up the highway from the speed trap and hold up a sign saying "Police ahead, slow down." Well, you can imagine what happened. They were arrested for obstruction of justice. However, the Texas Court of Appeals eventually ruled that the kids holding the sign were only encouraging people to obey the law and doing that can never be considered obstruction of justice. They also said that the arrest was a violation of their 1st Amendment right to free speech. Bottom line: the state will tolerate a lot but the minute you start to threaten their revenue stream, they'll come down on you like the wrath of god.
From: Bill on 22 Feb 2007 19:16 "Timberwoof" <timberwoof.spam(a)infernosoft.com> wrote in message news:timberwoof.spam-C70261.13343022022007(a)nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net... > In article <ZtmDh.227$M65.170(a)newssvr21.news.prodigy.net>, > "Bill" <you.gotta(a)be.kidding> wrote: > >> "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS" <xeton2001(a)yahoo.com> wrote in >> message news:Xns98DED37715599riemann1850yahoocom(a)207.217.125.201... >> > "Doc" <docsavage20(a)yahoo.com> wrote in news:1172104813.013364.273130 >> > @h3g2000cwc.googlegroups.com: >> > >> >> The issue of red-light cams has come up in Florida. An article in >> >> today's paper doesn't seem to indicate that there's any method to >> >> prove that the light was actually red when the car went through the >> >> intersection - such as a second photo showing your vehicle in the >> >> intersection and the light. >> >> >> >> In states where these systems are in place, do they include any such >> >> evidence to verify the red light or is it simply assumed that the >> >> system is perfect, that the photo of your plate was taken properly and >> >> that of course you were in violation? >> >> >> > >> > Oh stop whining you big baby. If these RLC are so faulty, then why have >> > i >> > NEVER been nabbed by one?? In any city i lived in?? Just obey the law >> > and >> > don't run red lights and you won't have any problem. >> > >> >> I received a red light camera ticket in the mail yesterday. The car was >> in >> the shop at the time, so obviously I wasn't the driver. But the city >> ordinance makes me financially responsible as the owner, regardless. I'll >> probably get the $75 out of the repair shop, but even if I do I have to >> waste the time. And if they won't pay, I'm screwed. >> >> Now tell me this is about safety and not revenue. >> >> - B > > Do these tickets cost points on your license? That will be even more > expensive. Fortunately, no. In Texas they would have to make it a criminal offense to do that. That would allow you the right to trial by jury, appeal, etc. -- all the things they don't want you to have. Instead they make it a civil penalty, so you have no recourse. The only exceptions they allow for are if the car or tag was previously reported stolen, if you're a car rental company, or if you have sold the car. - B
From: Free Lunch on 22 Feb 2007 20:03 On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 14:27:35 -0600, in misc.transport.road russotto(a)grace.speakeasy.net (Matthew T. Russotto) wrote in <cp-dnXY58LIqYUDYnZ2dnUVZ_vCknZ2d(a)speakeasy.net>: >In article <544b92F1uv9lgU4(a)mid.individual.net>, >brink <brink(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>While we're on the subject, I'd like to know how the RLC differentiates >>between legal movements against a red light (specifically right turns on >>red) from illegal movements. Anyone? > >Ticket 'em all and don't bother to sort them out. If too many people >complain, a "no right turn on red" sign solves the problem. I was given a ticket for not stopping at a stop sign. I have no idea whether the judge in the city court had seen his docket or not, but in his introduction he noted that people don't stop for stop signs and that he wasn't going to believe anyone about stopping. At least it was an actual cop that ticketed me.
From: Calgary on 22 Feb 2007 20:18
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 13:34:30 -0800, Timberwoof <timberwoof.spam(a)infernosoft.com> wrote: > >Do these tickets cost points on your license? That will be even more >expensive. In Alberta we do not have license plates on the front of our vehicles, and because of that all pictures are taken from the rear with no view of the driver. Since the driver cannot be identified the financial responsibility for the ticket defaults to the owner, but since it can't be proven the owner was the driver there are no points levied to the license. -- 24 hours in a day & 24 beer in a case Coincidence? I think not |