• 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!

Judge: Town's speeding cameras are '3 Card Monty' scam

jamesrage said:
I have mixed feelings on this.I believe that if people were not speeding or running red lights then they would not be getting fined,so its their own damn fault they got fined. At the same time people should be able to face their accusers. And maybe I watched Robocop movies one too many times but I believe that law enforcement duties should be carried out only by law enforcement not private companies and machines.

Judge: Town's speeding cameras are '3 Card Monty' scam
Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Robert Ruehlman on Thursday ruled that the village's ordinance violated due process. He issued an injunction barring its enforcement.
There have been numerous legal challenges across the U.S. to red-light camera laws but observers said this is the first ruling they know of striking down a municipality's speeding-camera law.
"Speed-camera cases have been litigated but we have not come across one where a judge has said, 'Stop this,'" attorney Mike Allen, whose firm brought the case, told MSN News on Friday. "I think it's going to touch off a firestorm around the country. I really do."
Calls and emails by MSN News to Elmwood Place village officials and police Chief William Peskin were not immediately returned on Friday. Allen said he expects the village to appeal.
Ruehlman sprinkled colorful language in his ruling striking down Elmwood's "automated speed enforcement program," which is carried out by Optotraffic, a Lanham, Md.-based company, under a contract with the village. Optotraffic gets a 40 percent cut of the revenues from fines it collects.
The two cameras installed in town reportedly resulted in 6,600 speeding citations — three times the village's population -— at $105 a pop in the first month after enforcement began in September.
The judge, who heard arguments in January, found that the ordinance fails to provide due process to people receiving a notice of fines in the mail. He said the village doesn’t have a sign warning motorists that traffic cameras are in operation, as required by state law.
To challenge the $105 fine, a motorist has to pay $25 for a hearing that is "nothing more than a sham!" the judge wrote. At the hearing, he said, the "witness" for the village testifies from a report produced by the company that owns the speed-monitoring unit. Since the "witness" was not present when the alleged violation occurred, he or she can't be cross-examined, Ruehlman wrote.
Click to expand...

That's a damned good point.
 
Mr.Nick said:
Yep...

Of course it's always about "public safety".... Like the government really cares about people? They want money to keep the machine going so these elitists can live high and mighty off the taxpayer while pretending to give a damn about the average Joe. If these clowns really cared they would let us keep our money...

I'm glad I live in Lake County, not that is much different up here...
Click to expand...

i have to admit that we had a huge problem in my berg with drivers running red lights
the camera system effectively eliminated that problem; in under a year
and even tho we no longer have those cameras in place, the propensity of drivers to run red lights has diminished compared to what it had been
i attribute that improvement to those cameras
 
Slateriesling said:
The stop light cameras in my neighborhood are set up to frustrate the commuters to increase the number of violations after the installation caused the violations to go down to such a low number the company wasn't making enough money. What they do is during the busy times in the morning and afternoon randomly have the lights change after only 2 cars got through a green light. This causes the motorists to get frustrated after waiting through 2 greenlights to run it. It is so bad that I know people that avoid the lights by driving through residential areas rather than get caught up in this ridiculous manipulation.

Anytime crime control becomes a for profit business, you can be sure you will be manipulated into breaking the law if you don't do it on your own. It is time for a Constitutional Amendment saying that for profit crime control, including for profit prisons should be illegal.
Click to expand...

That is seriously F'd up. Have you considered trying to get a local news station or paper to investigate it?
 
Pilot said:
That is seriously F'd up. Have you considered trying to get a local news station or paper to investigate it?
Click to expand...

Since the local paper was bought up by the guy that owns all of the papers in the county the paper is useless. This paper has turned into a personal agenda vehicle for his political ambitions. Talk about F'd up.

There has been a s**t storm over it though. Unfortunantly the city made a deal where the town only gets money out of the deal after a certain amount of money was made by the company. Meaning if there are not enough violations the town gets nothing. That seems to be all the politicians are worried about. However, I do think that a decision was made to get rid of the cameras after the contract time period expired. Not to mention I think the lights were changed to not do it so much so that it was not so obvious. Used to be that it would be happening every day, now I only see it 2-3 times/month. They must have changed it when they realized the public was catching on.
 
Slateriesling said:
The stop light cameras in my neighborhood are set up to frustrate the commuters to increase the number of violations after the installation caused the violations to go down to such a low number the company wasn't making enough money. What they do is during the busy times in the morning and afternoon randomly have the lights change after only 2 cars got through a green light. This causes the motorists to get frustrated after waiting through 2 greenlights to run it. It is so bad that I know people that avoid the lights by driving through residential areas rather than get caught up in this ridiculous manipulation.

Anytime crime control becomes a for profit business, you can be sure you will be manipulated into breaking the law if you don't do it on your own. It is time for a Constitutional Amendment saying that for profit crime control, including for profit prisons should be illegal.
Click to expand...

I beleive there is an exepmtion in the red light law that if the light is derfective you can legally go through it.

If the light is set for 2 cars ata time, the light is defective.
 
ksu_aviator said:
I got a red light ticket once. I had stopped in the intersection for a stray dog. Could not get it dismissed because the dog was in front of the car and the camera was behind me. They didn't have video back then. Supposedly now they have video.

My neighbor got one for his daughter's car when her boyfriend ran the red light. He went to the judge and told him who was driving the car and the judge said, and I quote, "You are responsible for the car because it is registered in your name". I wasn't aware of that rule.
Click to expand...

And that is bull****. Wonder if that judge is getting any kickback on those tickets?
 
i don't support them. most of the reason is that they set the speeds artificially low. i'm the furthest thing from a speed demon that you'll ever meet, and i routinely see four lane roads or rural roads outside of town that are designed for 40 to 45 mph, yet the speed limit is 30 or less. it's hard to explain, but it's difficult to drive at a speed so far below the speed the road seems to be designed for. also, i don't like that level of monitoring.
 
Slateriesling said:
The stop light cameras in my neighborhood are set up to frustrate the commuters to increase the number of violations after the installation caused the violations to go down to such a low number the company wasn't making enough money. What they do is during the busy times in the morning and afternoon randomly have the lights change after only 2 cars got through a green light. This causes the motorists to get frustrated after waiting through 2 greenlights to run it. It is so bad that I know people that avoid the lights by driving through residential areas rather than get caught up in this ridiculous manipulation.

Anytime crime control becomes a for profit business, you can be sure you will be manipulated into breaking the law if you don't do it on your own. It is time for a Constitutional Amendment saying that for profit crime control, including for profit prisons should be illegal.
Click to expand...

Absofreeginlutely! Can't like this post enough.
 
Helix said:
i don't support them. most of the reason is that they set the speeds artificially low. i'm the furthest thing from a speed demon that you'll ever meet, and i routinely see four lane roads or rural roads outside of town that are designed for 40 to 45 mph, yet the speed limit is 30 or less. it's hard to explain, but it's difficult to drive at a speed so far below the speed the road seems to be designed for. also, i don't like that level of monitoring.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what is going on here in Santa Fe. 4 lane roads also that have fat medians with turning lanes... 30mph. Give me a freegin break. And the speed trap van is there regularly.
 
Slateriesling said:
Since the local paper was bought up by the guy that owns all of the papers in the county the paper is useless. This paper has turned into a personal agenda vehicle for his political ambitions. Talk about F'd up.
Click to expand...

How cute... you have your very own little Berlusconi.
 
poweRob said:
This is exactly what is going on here in Santa Fe. 4 lane roads also that have fat medians with turning lanes... 30mph. Give me a freegin break. And the speed trap van is there regularly.
Click to expand...

i'm certainly not advocating for dangerous speed limits, but realistic ones would be nice. they should probably set them somewhere in between the eighty to eighty fifth percentile speeds.
 
Helix said:
i don't support them. most of the reason is that they set the speeds artificially low. i'm the furthest thing from a speed demon that you'll ever meet, and i routinely see four lane roads or rural roads outside of town that are designed for 40 to 45 mph, yet the speed limit is 30 or less. it's hard to explain, but it's difficult to drive at a speed so far below the speed the road seems to be designed for. also, i don't like that level of monitoring.
Click to expand...

You are the last person who should be trying to advocate for the removal of speed and redlight cameras. Because people will look at your opposition as rooted in the fact you want to drive over the speed limit.
 
jamesrage said:
You are the last person who should be trying to advocate for the removal of speed and redlight cameras. Because people will look at your opposition as rooted in the fact you want to drive over the speed limit.
Click to expand...

i would like to drive at the safe speed that the road was designed for. people can read into my opposition anything they want, because it doesn't matter. however, i try to be as safe as possible, because i don't want to hurt myself or anyone else.
 
If you ever get a ticket from one of these, just ask the court to provide the calibration records for the camera unit to prove it is functioning properly.

If you ever get a speeding ticket from a cop with a radar gun, ask for the calibration records for the radar gun and ask for the records showing the police officer was properly trained to use it.

It's usually pointless to try to get out of a speeding ticket, but showing up in court can get the points waived if you don't get another ticket in an amount of time set by the judge.
 
Helix said:
i would like to drive at the safe speed that the road was designed for. people can read into my opposition anything they want, because it doesn't matter. however, i try to be as safe as possible, because i don't want to hurt myself or anyone else.
Click to expand...

How do you know what a safe speed that road is designed for? Are you a street designer? I think you are just wanting an excuse to speed.
 
jamesrage said:
You are the last person who should be trying to advocate for the removal of speed and redlight cameras. Because people will look at your opposition as rooted in the fact you want to drive over the speed limit.
Click to expand...

I drive over the posted limit most of the time. But many times I'm driving under the posted limit. I drive safely. How can a bureaucrat in the state government determine what the speed limit should be. As other posters have pointed out, considering road design and other factors, most speed limits are arbitrary and unrealistic.

Like most folks, I drive at a speed I am comfortable with, depending upon road conditions and traffic.

If one pays attention, many cops drive over the posted limit without red lights on, talking on the cell phone. I can drive as well as they can.
 
Helix said:
i would like to drive at the safe speed that the road was designed for. people can read into my opposition anything they want, because it doesn't matter. however, i try to be as safe as possible, because i don't want to hurt myself or anyone else.
Click to expand...

excellent point
interstates, based on germany's autobahn, were normally designed to accommodate a 100 mph road speed; like many tools now available, the user is often the only thing holding back its potential performance
 
I think only the police should be allowed to operate such a speed camera, they can (like in the Netherlands) have all the transactions/fines collecting by one organization which can levy on top of the fine transaction costs (in the Netherlands those are about 8 dollars on top of the ticket). In the Netherlands this is done by a governmental organization but in the US you can choose to have this done by a commercial company which can charge a nominal fee (fixed fee) for example of 10 dollars on top of the fine to do all the administrative processes of collecting such a fine.

Having a speed camera operated by a commercial company which gets 40% of revenue should be made illegal IMHO because levying fines should be done to help road safety, not line the pockets of commercial enterprises.
 
justabubba said:
excellent point
interstates, based on germany's autobahn, were normally designed to accommodate a 100 mph road speed; like many tools now available, the user is often the only thing holding back its potential performance
Click to expand...

I agree.....also I would consider the construct of our Roads as compared to the Autobahn. The Autobahn has far less repairs than our roads do. Which is due to us not building Roads the in the same way. Which the Autobahn is safer.
 
jamesrage said:
I have mixed feelings on this.I believe that if people were not speeding or running red lights then they would not be getting fined,so its their own damn fault they got fined. At the same time people should be able to face their accusers. And maybe I watched Robocop movies one too many times but I believe that law enforcement duties should be carried out only by law enforcement not private companies and machines.

Judge: Town's speeding cameras are '3 Card Monty' scam
Hamilton County Common Pleas Judge Robert Ruehlman on Thursday ruled that the village's ordinance violated due process. He issued an injunction barring its enforcement.
There have been numerous legal challenges across the U.S. to red-light camera laws but observers said this is the first ruling they know of striking down a municipality's speeding-camera law.
"Speed-camera cases have been litigated but we have not come across one where a judge has said, 'Stop this,'" attorney Mike Allen, whose firm brought the case, told MSN News on Friday. "I think it's going to touch off a firestorm around the country. I really do."
Calls and emails by MSN News to Elmwood Place village officials and police Chief William Peskin were not immediately returned on Friday. Allen said he expects the village to appeal.
Ruehlman sprinkled colorful language in his ruling striking down Elmwood's "automated speed enforcement program," which is carried out by Optotraffic, a Lanham, Md.-based company, under a contract with the village. Optotraffic gets a 40 percent cut of the revenues from fines it collects.
The two cameras installed in town reportedly resulted in 6,600 speeding citations — three times the village's population -— at $105 a pop in the first month after enforcement began in September.
The judge, who heard arguments in January, found that the ordinance fails to provide due process to people receiving a notice of fines in the mail. He said the village doesn’t have a sign warning motorists that traffic cameras are in operation, as required by state law.
To challenge the $105 fine, a motorist has to pay $25 for a hearing that is "nothing more than a sham!" the judge wrote. At the hearing, he said, the "witness" for the village testifies from a report produced by the company that owns the speed-monitoring unit. Since the "witness" was not present when the alleged violation occurred, he or she can't be cross-examined, Ruehlman wrote.
Click to expand...
The part in red is my primary objection. (There are others, too)

It doesn't help that the company that runs our local camera system gets paid per ticket, which IMO only serves to encourage dishonesty. I don't think law enforcement should should be contracted out privately at all to begin with, but if it has to be it should be done on a flat fee basis, whether the camera cites one motorist or 1000.
 
justabubba said:
excellent point
interstates, based on germany's autobahn, were normally designed to accommodate a 100 mph road speed; like many tools now available, the user is often the only thing holding back its potential performance
Click to expand...

Well, then you are forgetting the technical aspect of the car and the performance of other cars. If the speed between users of the autobahn is too great, accidents will happen and be more dramatic and deadly than with speeds of 85 miles an hour.

For example, if someone driving 85 miles an hour wants to pass a truck driving 60 miles an hour he will look in his mirrors and see a car a long ways back, thinking it is safe he starts passing the truck. Unfortunately, if no speed limits exists (like on some parts of the Autobahn) and the driver is driving upward of 125 miles (155 miles has also been driven on the autobahn, and faster), accidents will happen.

If you know that logically the driver coming up behind is at most 10 to 15 miles faster than you, and not driving 40 to 80 miles faster than you, you can gue-estimate how safe you are in you attempt to pass the car you want to pass. If however the driver coming up behind you is 80 miles faster than your car will be on your tail in seconds flat and may or not be able to break in time to not plow into you, this will most likely at that speed be enough to kill you in 2 seconds flat.

Speed is an issue because not everybody wants to drive like a maniac or has a car that is able to drive at these insane speeds.
 
radcen said:
The part in red is my primary objection. (There are others, too)

It doesn't help that the company that runs our local camera system gets paid per ticket, which IMO only serves to encourage dishonesty. I don't think law enforcement should should be contracted out privately at all to begin with, but if it has to be it should be done on a flat fee basis, whether the camera cites one motorist or 1000.
Click to expand...

Several years ago I became involved on the local level with city government over the issue of RLC. The city was proposing to put them in. I grew up in this town and know several of the commissioners. I was working with the city PD on what was proposed.

It turns out, the system is driven by the company, in this case ATS. The politicians are lobbied by the company. The city just north of us was also being lobbied. Anyway, I was briefed by 2 different police officers in charge of the program that was being proposed to the city.

In terms of generating revenue in the ideal design configuration, the system is like shooting fish in a barrel. It's a sure thing. Like the house in a gambling place, the system is rigged in favor of making tons of money on such a system. It is a statistical certainty that a certain number of people will be caught in the box on any given day. I think I was told the ideal situation--heavy traffic and good intersection, could generate 5 offenses an hour. Very lucrative.

So we fought the proposal and eventually won. Once people understood what was happening they were against it. Also, state government changed the rules, and it became not nearly as lucrative, so the city abandoned the plan. ATS guys were mad...
 
Peter King said:
Well, then you are forgetting the technical aspect of the car and the performance of other cars. If the speed between users of the autobahn is too great, accidents will happen and be more dramatic and deadly than with speeds of 85 miles an hour.

For example, if someone driving 85 miles an hour wants to pass a truck driving 60 miles an hour he will look in his mirrors and see a car a long ways back, thinking it is safe he starts passing the truck. Unfortunately, if no speed limits exists (like on some parts of the Autobahn) and the driver is driving upward of 125 miles (155 miles has also been driven on the autobahn, and faster), accidents will happen.

If you know that logically the driver coming up behind is at most 10 to 15 miles faster than you, and not driving 40 to 80 miles faster than you, you can gue-estimate how safe you are in you attempt to pass the car you want to pass. If however the driver coming up behind you is 80 miles faster than your car will be on your tail in seconds flat and may or not be able to break in time to not plow into you, this will most likely at that speed be enough to kill you in 2 seconds flat.

Speed is an issue because not everybody wants to drive like a maniac or has a car that is able to drive at these insane speeds.
Click to expand...
you are arguing that many motorists are too underskilled to drive at a high rate of speed

notice how that differs from my argument that the interstates are (often) designed to be driven at 100 mph
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom