• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should DUI checkpoint and red light cam apps be banned?

Should DUI checkpoint and red light cam apps be banned?

  • Only the DUI checkpoint app should be banned.

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    37
Perhaps the system in Fort Worth is not the only system? I received a violation notice in Duncanville and had no recourse unless my car had been reported stolen. I couldn't argue that I had stopped, and then made a legal turn on red. I couldn't attend any meeting or function to contest the "charges". It was "pay it or you won't be able to renew your registration next year".


These companies legally have to record the offense. When i got mine they sent me the link to the video.
 
What rights are we referring to, exactly? Because I am not aware of any right to drunk or reckless driving.

Probable cause...........police cant just stop you and hope to find something to charge you with.

These are banned in TEXAS
 
I think you should have sought legal advice or asked to speak with a manager or file a complaint. I think someone is bull****ing you.




I agree with that a 100%.Law enforcement should be only done by law enforcement not by companies.

Law enforcement makes the decsion to ticket you or not..............the company handles the paperwork and shuffles the money
 
Red light cameras violate my Constitutional right to confront my accuser. Because a piece of electronic equipment cannot physically testify against me or be proven a reliable witness in court, their “evidence” against me should be unenforceable.

That's a fair argument.
 
The reason I would be ok with the red light cameras is that at the very least they do not fire (take a picture) less someone is actually breaking the law. The check points, however, are well more general and they pull over everyone even if they have not driven in a manner which would have broken the law.

There have been documented cases of cities shortening the yellow lights on intersections where red light cameras are placed, making the intersections actually more dangerous, just to boost revenue. The system operating the cameras is automated, so it does not have the judgement of an officer sitting on the same corner. As a ridiculous example, if I move partially in to an intersection on a red light in order to make way for a passing emergency vehicle, I'll be photographed and ticketed. An officer would be able to see that, a computer system just takes a picture and, in court, it's my word against the picture, if I'm even able to notice that I had a picture taken and connect it mentally to the time I was moving out of the way of the ambulance.

However, we've gotten a bit off track here. This is about the actual mapping apps, not the cameras or checkpoints themselves, and I stand by my statement that there's nothing wrong with the apps in question. :)
 
Yes you can contest it. Lawyers are making a living off of it. The city that has the cameras gets the lions share of the revenue. The state gets a portion, and the company that installed them gets a portion plus a monthly fee for maintaining them. These deals are made with individual cities.........not the state..........We in Houston voted them out...........and they were promptly turned off. Also the state not renewing your licence is a bluff..............the state made no such deal. They just put that on the fine to scare you into paying it. Why would the state not renew your 60 registration over a their 10% of a $75 dollar fine (7.50) Makes no sense

They wouldn't be able to put that the registration will not be renewed if that were not the case. Somebody would have raised holy hell and had that removed from the forms if it weren't valid.
 
Yes you can contest it. Lawyers are making a living off of it. The city that has the cameras gets the lions share of the revenue. The state gets a portion, and the company that installed them gets a portion plus a monthly fee for maintaining them. These deals are made with individual cities.........not the state..........We in Houston voted them out...........and they were promptly turned off. Also the state not renewing your licence is a bluff..............the state made no such deal. They just put that on the fine to scare you into paying it. Why would the state not renew your 60 registration over a their 10% of a $75 dollar fine (7.50) Makes no sense

Also, not $75. I received a $250 fine.
 
That's a fair argument.


It's a stupid argument. The camera is activated by the red light going on, and triggered by a vehicle crossing against it. The process is testable and verifiable. The camera is not the accuser, but the agency controlling the camera is.
 
They wouldn't be able to put that the registration will not be renewed if that were not the case. Somebody would have raised holy hell and had that removed from the forms if it weren't valid.

Re-read the letter...........they say it may or can.........the state did not sign on to this. Do a little research on the things...........and see just how many people just tell them to piss off and send it to collections..........cause thats as bad as it can get.............
 
I should be able to avoid a DUI check point because I don't drink and I hate red light cams.

They don't allow for greater traffic flow but exist to catch the every so often red light runner for city revenue.

The apps are fine with me.
 
It's a stupid argument. The camera is activated by the red light going on, and triggered by a vehicle crossing against it. The process is testable and verifiable. The camera is not the accuser, but the agency controlling the camera is.

ITs just like parking ticket............you are guilty until you prove yourself innocent..................thats ass backwards buddy..............good luck getting my car to pay the fine
 
Should DUI checkpoint and red light cam apps be banned?

Neither should be banned.
Both should be banned.
Only the DUI checkpoint app should be banned.
Only the Red Light came app should be banned.
I do not know know/maybe.





As far as I am concerned the government has no business banning either.If I choose to want to have these apps then it is my business. Besides that they usually advertise on TV where and when they are going to have DUI check point.And as far as I am concerned red light cams only prove that it was your car that ran the red light not you,so you should not be forced to pay for a ticket for an offenses that you did not do nor can they prove you did.




I remember commenting in another thread how this should be invent,it looks like somebody already has.
Four senators target DUI checkpoint apps - USATODAY.com
In a letter Tuesday, the senators asked Apple, Google and BlackBerry to either disable or quit selling downloadable applications that allow iPhone and iPad, BlackBerry and Android operating systems to identify locations of local police DUI crackdowns.

"We know that your companies share our desire to end the scourge of drunk driving, and we therefore would ask you to remove these applications from your store unless they are altered to remove the DUI/DWI checkpoint functionality," wrote Sens. Harry Reid of Nevada, Charles Schumer of New York, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey and Tom Udall of New Mexico.

I like the camera cams as a means of intimidating drivers to obey laws. I would like to see portable units that can be set into neighborhoods to catch speeders, or country roads, etc. We have laws and the laws should be enforced. The cam is the cheapest way to do that.


I feel DUI check points should be illegal, as the police are allowed to intrude on the majority's sober life, for the sake of one drunk. Instead, how about some hard core laws to intimidate drunks into submission. eg. You DUI, you forfit your car or whoevers car you were driving, you lose your driver license for 5 years, you go to prison for 5 years if caught driving after the initial sentence. Instead of trying to stop DUI criminals, they work on prevention, such as a sniffer device set up in a booth outside a bar or night club, that measures your alcohol level. Elmo knows they tax bar owners enough to set up such devices.

Law enforcement has no right to require any business stop making devices to assist a person in the commission of a crime. Next they will want QVC to stop advertising knife sets. The slippery slope syndrome.
 
It's a stupid argument. The camera is activated by the red light going on, and triggered by a vehicle crossing against it. The process is testable and verifiable. The camera is not the accuser, but the agency controlling the camera is.

I already addressed this. A machine cannot make a judgment call like a human officer can. The machine sees something over a certain line while the light is red and it takes a picture and issues a ticket. The officer can see the same thing and determine whether or not a ticket is warranted. He can also defend his judgement in court. A camera cannot. The agency controlling the camera was not on-scene or even actively monitoring or controlling the camera. The system is automated. Besides, a machine often requires calibration to be correct, a human does not.

If the point of the cameras is increased public safety, why have there been multiple cities caught dangerously shortening the yellow lights in order to boost the number of tickets generated? Why do red light cameras that are not proving to be profitable get taken down? The answer is simple, it's really just about revenue under the guise of public safety.

Couldn't it be argued that an app is promoting public safety just as much as the checkpoints and cameras are? If I know there's a checkpoint on my way home, then maybe I'll skip having that 2nd or 3rd beer. If I know there's red light cameras on my way to work, maybe I'll leave a few minutes early so I'm not having to speed through the intersections.
 
Last edited:
Did you mistake the poll for "DUI checkpoints and red cams" instead of "DUI check points and red light cam apps"?

Yes, yes I did. Damned it.
 
Neither should be banned. As far as I am aware, it is not against the law to avoid a DUI checkpoint or red light camera by taking another route. Ergo, there is no legal reason for which to ban them.

And personally, I think they're a fantastic idea. I'm try to avoid DUI checkpoints if I can, because I don't like waiting to go through them. And I absolutely despise red light cameras. They cause more accidents than they prevent, and they often times try to ticket you for something legal (like a right turn on red).
 
There is no purpose to these applications except to make it easier to break the law and these particular laws are absolutely necessary for public safety.

Agree...but what pisses me off is that (in this state anyway), first-time offenders for DUI get 48-hours in jail, are forced to do three 8-hour shifts of garbage pick-up; one year on a restricted license; and one year probation (the last two parts don't bother me).

BUT, get caught texting and driving (proven over and over to be much more dangerous) and you get a $50 fine.
News Headlines

We presently have no law against talking on a phone while driving, but that's considered equally as dangerous.
Drivers on Cell Phones Are as Bad as Drunks - University of Utah News Release: June 29th, 2006

In other words, these laws really aren't about highway safety at all or they would treat equally dangerous driving as equally dangerous. But they don't.

Yes. Drunk drivers account for 29% of accidents (though some questions those statistics). But that means dumb-ass sober drivers account for 71% of them.

If you get pulled over for a DUI and you've not actually caused anyone any harm, why is that worse than someone who drives poorly sober but does cause a wreck?
 
Drunk driving laws have a century of advocacy from the Temperance League. Cell phones are new, and almost nobody is opposed to the idea of cell phones, so the laws will never have the same lobbying pressure.
 
Should DUI checkpoint and red light cam apps be banned?

Neither should be banned.
Both should be banned.
Only the DUI checkpoint app should be banned.
Only the Red Light came app should be banned.
I do not know know/maybe.

As far as I am concerned the government has no business banning either.If I choose to want to have these apps then it is my business. Besides that they usually advertise on TV where and when they are going to have DUI check point.And as far as I am concerned red light cams only prove that it was your car that ran the red light not you,so you should not be forced to pay for a ticket for an offenses that you did not do nor can they prove you did.



I remember commenting in another thread how this should be invent,it looks like somebody already has.
Four senators target DUI checkpoint apps - USATODAY.com
In a letter Tuesday, the senators asked Apple, Google and BlackBerry to either disable or quit selling downloadable applications that allow iPhone and iPad, BlackBerry and Android operating systems to identify locations of local police DUI crackdowns.

"We know that your companies share our desire to end the scourge of drunk driving, and we therefore would ask you to remove these applications from your store unless they are altered to remove the DUI/DWI checkpoint functionality," wrote Sens. Harry Reid of Nevada, Charles Schumer of New York, Frank Lautenberg of New Jersey and Tom Udall of New Mexico.

I mis-voted. I'd vote "Other." If state's want to make using them illegal, that's on them. (Just like radar detectors....they make 'em, but in many states they're illegal.)
 
Drunk driving laws have a century of advocacy from the Temperance League. Cell phones are new, and almost nobody is opposed to the idea of cell phones, so the laws will never have the same lobbying pressure.

So talking and texting on cell phones is more wildly accepted so even though it's just as dangerous, if not more, than drinking and driving; because so many people do it and have not associated a negative stereotype due to decades of MADD and other propagandists, it's ok?
 
The apps should not be banned. However both of these big brother nanny state law enforcement tools which violate the constitution should be banned.
 
Last edited:
So talking and texting on cell phones is more wildly accepted so even though it's just as dangerous, if not more, than drinking and driving; because so many people do it and have not associated a negative stereotype due to decades of MADD and other propagandists, it's ok?

I didn't say anything about "okay". I said that texting-while-driving laws will never receive the same political support as drunk driving laws because there's nobody opposed to using cell phones in principle.

If I had my way, using a cell phone while driving would carry penalties similar to DUI. You might have noticed this already, but I never get my way.
 
I didn't say anything about "okay". I said that texting-while-driving laws will never receive the same political support as drunk driving laws because there's nobody opposed to using cell phones in principle.

If I had my way, using a cell phone while driving would carry penalties similar to DUI. You might have noticed this already, but I never get my way.

Yeah, well neither do I, for if I had my way DUI penalties would be similar to cell phone penalties. At least if you didn't cause an accident or damage property.
 
Okay, I misunderstood the question. I thought the question was whether red light cameras and DUI checkpoints should be banned... I don't think they should be. Apps that help drunks and reckless drivers avoid getting caught, yes, they should be banned. So my answer on the poll is wrong. :(
 
Neither should be banned. Both DUI checkpoints and Red Light Cameras are violations of a citizen's rights, and are really nothing more than shameless money grabs on the part of the state. There is no law that prevents citizens from sharing the locations of a checkpoint or camera personally, so why should an app that does the same thing be banned? However, even if these companies do remove the apps from their official stores, I see that having no impact on the average smart device user. Any app banned from the official app store is usually available on the jailbroken market within a matter of days. I'd love to see government try to go after the actual producers of the software and win that one in court. ;)

Amen.......

......ban them both.
.
.
.
 
Back
Top Bottom