A red light violation is a moving violation, at least in Virginia and accordingto Wiki. I'd bet the same holds true in Illinois. A movng violation is a trffic violation while the car is in motion. How do you run a red light in a stationary vehicle? And you are not guilty of a violation because you own the car. The driver is. If your car is EMPTY and coasts from its parking spot into another vehicle? You may not have been the driver who left it in gear, but . . . as the owner? You're going to pay the damages.
In this country, you are never automatically guilty. You are innocent till proven guilty. That applies to murder, that applies to auto related violations. That applies to spitting on the sidewalk. It's the basis of our judiciary system,
A red-light camera ticket is not a moving violation. If you have proof that it is, please post it. If one is ticketed by a
police officer for blowing a red light, then it
is a moving violation. Please cite your Wiki source.
In this country, you are automatically guilty of LOTS of things just like this. Your car is given a parking ticket. You may not have parked it in the illegal spot, but guess what? As the owner? You're responsible. Your car is parked in a handicapped spot. You may not have parked it in that spot, but guess what? As the owner? You're responsible.
Edit: If your car was left in gear and is EMPTY, rolls down a hill into someone's car or a little kid, guess who's responsible? You. As the owner of the car.
You're not supposed to be automatically guilty of anything, but due to mindless rationalizations such as some have displayed in this thread, we keep losing that benchmark bit by bit.
The notion that the owner of a vehicle is somehow responsible for the actions of the driver if the driver is different is simply repugnant and flies in the face of everything our society and justice system is supposed to be about. Might as well just randomly assign penalties to people for what they did without actually getting caught. Same difference.
Please see my response to Jimbo.
To make way for emergency vehicles.
Rushing someone to the hospital.
Those are just two that instantly come to mind.
It is not legal to go through a red light in either of those instances.
Some people here have gotten tickets for making a right turn on a red, and that's legal. Yet, the camera doesn't know the difference and the mindless bureaucrat reviewing the ticket doesn't care because there's no proof that you were actually doing something legal.
How about the person sitting in the intersection waiting to make a left turn. They can't because of traffic, so they do have to wait until the opposing traffic stops because their light turned red. The left-turn car is perfectly legal as they were in the intersection when the light changed... but the camera doesn't know the difference and the mindless bureaucrat reviewing the ticket doesn't care because there's no proof that you were actually doing something legal.
22% of all traffic accidents in the United States are the result of people running red lights, causing some $7 billion in property damage.
Your car is ticketed for
entering the intersection after the light changes to red. Even if your car is still in the intersection after the light turns red, no photograph (or video) will be taken and no ticket will be issued. At legal right-turn intersections, the camera will only take a photograph (or video) of your car if you fail to stop before turning.
A photograph of the violation is mailed to the car owner. Usually, a video or additional stills are available on line.
In some states, if you aren't the driver of the car, you have to appear in court to establish "by photo comparison" that it wasn't you. Not in all, because it's a civil violation, not a moving one.
I have absolutely no sympathy for people who run red lights. They kill people every day.