Abolish Traffic Enforcement Cameras

joko104 said:

There are people who want the government watching everything they do to protect them from themselves. There are always people who hate and fear freedom, other people and even themselves. Those people essentially declare the government is their "God" and therefore "laws" are the will of their god.

I seriously doubt the American revolution was not due to colonists being outraged that the King of England wasn't regulating and policing them enough. It amazes me how many Americans now rage against personal freedom and privacy on behalf of wanting an all-seeing police state.

Click to expand...

Revolution over traffic cameras! YYEEEEAAARRRRGGHHHHH!!!

Bob Blaylock said:

I think there's a bigger issue than that.

Laws are supposed to be for the benefit of the people. We enact laws, and set up mechanism to enforce them, in the hopes that people will obey these laws, and by doing so, create a safer, more orderly society in which everyone's rights and everyone's legitimate interests are protected.

Here, we have a situation where laws and enforcement mechanisms are set up in the hope that people will be caught violating them, so that government can use this as an excuse to fine them. The profit is motive, not safety or order. For government to take part in this sort of practice is pure corruption.

Click to expand...

Though there may be a grain of truth to this, I don't entirely buy it. For three reasons.

1. Even if all of this were true, people are reacting to alleged extremism with extremism of their own. This is not a cut-and-dry, black-and-white issue. There needs to be a balance between protecting the safety of law-abiding drivers vs. maintaining the rights of the ones who are accused of violating the law.

2. I live very close to an area that has traffic light cameras everywhere. And I drive through those intersections quite often. Number of times I have received a ticket from one of them? Zero.

3. Where is all this outcry over the for-profit prison system, which enslaves imprisons one-in-three African-American men in his lifetime?

It is not the opposition to the traffic cameras per se that I have a problem with. There are some valid concerns raised. Rather, it is the militancy, the imbecile references to the Revolution and the Founding Fathers, the I'm-right-you're-wrong attitude that many of them show. Let's get one thing clear right now: Tens of thousands of people die on our roads every year. That should be the major concern here, not whether someone got a ticket because they chose to run a red light. If the yellow lights are allegedly too short, then people need to go out there and gather the evidence for themselves. Measure the width of the intersection when it's safe to do so, then get out a stopwatch and calculate exactly what the yellow time is. Then submit that information to city council or whatever authority is responsible. If, and I do mean if, that is done, and if properly-gathered evidence clearly shows that the yellow light times must be lengthened, and the authorities refuse to grant a bit more leeway to yellow lights, THEN AND ONLY THEN is it fair to start protesting the cameras. And not one minute before.

Cephus said:

If they were driving properly, neither would be an issue.

Click to expand...

Thing is, even when people are driving properly, they get spooked by the presence of law enforcement (be it in the form of a cruiser or a camera). I drive a car that is easily mistaken for a police car, and never fail I see people react dumbly as I drive down the freeway. Even people who were not doing anything wrong prior to me being there.

I'm not saying that this number of accidents would be extraordinary or even statistically significant, but I do see it as a possibility.

year2late said:

Because the potential for accidents is high. So it is a public service (deterrent) and a revenue producer all rolled in one. Damn, I love me a twofer.

Click to expand...

Any time you get inside of a motor vehicle and drive down a street the potential for an accident is high.

In practice I agree that the intersection cameras likely do provide a good incentive for people to obey traffic laws, however on principal I am opposed to their use. It's a really difficult position to maintain, but alas that's where I stand.

FreedomFromAll said:

lol We were thinking about shooting out some cameras (I think).

Click to expand...

I'm game, just give me the time/ place.

Maybe it could be our civic duty.

Traffic control cameras and CCTV are GREAT ideas and should stay around. Don't want a ticket? Drive safer and slow down.

You need to look at the ticket. Its typically a civil issue. In my state they can't put a warrant on you for failure to pay because it isn't a criminal act. I never pay them. Because the DPS says its illegal to force me to pay. No sense in abolishing them they are toothless in the first place. As a matter of fact my state legislature is in court with the city government attempting to force the city to repay anybody that paid the voluntary "fine."

Look at your state laws, if it isn't a criminal accusation, inany case I can't imagine it being being that it isn't constitutional to accuse you of a crime with no hard evidence, after all they couldn't possibly know that it is the registered owner of the vehicle driving it at the moment the camera took the picture. Don't pay them unless you have to.

CLAX1911 said:

You need to look at the ticket. Its typically a civil issue. In my state they can't put a warrant on you for failure to pay because it isn't a criminal act. I never pay them. Because the DPS says its illegal to force me to pay. No sense in abolishing them they are toothless in the first place. As a matter of fact my state legislature is in court with the city government attempting to force the city to repay anybody that paid the voluntary "fine."

Look at your state laws, if it isn't a criminal accusation, inany case I can't imagine it being being that it isn't constitutional to accuse you of a crime with no hard evidence, after all they couldn't possibly know that it is the registered owner of the vehicle driving it at the moment the camera took the picture. Don't pay them unless you have to.

Click to expand...

In my state it is a civil issue also, hence the skating around the Constitutional issues of not identifying the driver and only going after the owner. I'm pretty sure they cannot issue a warrant for not paying, but from what I understand they do send you to a collection agency, and ding your credit at the least.

This state, however, has a long list of fines and penalties and fees that must be paid and up-to-date before you can renew a vehicle license or drivers license, including many things that aren't related to driving or vehicle ownership at all. I do not know if this would fall into that category as well.

radcen said:

In my state it is a civil issue also, hence the skating around the Constitutional issues of not identifying the driver and only going after the owner. I'm pretty sure they cannot issue a warrant for not paying, but from what I understand they do send you to a collection agency, and ding your credit at the least.

This state, however, has a long list of fines and penalties and fees that must be paid and up-to-date before you can renew a vehicle license or drivers license, including many things that aren't related to driving or vehicle ownership at all. I do not know if this would fall into that category as well.

Click to expand...

Here the city says they will tell the state not to allow the owner to register the vehicle if this bill isn't paid. The state tells the city, "up yours they want to pay us." State doesn't get a cut, all streets roads and so forth belong to the state thus the state always gets a cut of traffic fines no matter what. Its almost like organized crime but the state doesn't see any of the traffic cam money. Its actually against our state law for a city to collect such fines.

Bodhisattva said:

Traffic control cameras and CCTV are GREAT ideas and should stay around. Don't want a ticket? Drive safer and slow down.

Click to expand...

The same reasoning could be used for things like 'warrantless searches dont matter if you have nothing to hide'.

if that is how the law is worded, the ONLY way to drive legally, since people do not have ESP and have no idea when a light will turn yellow, is to stop at every GREEN light and wait for it to go thru the yellow and red cycle - and then go when it turns green again. If a person is willing to gamble the light will remain green and does not stop at every green light, then they obviously should be prepared to slam on their brakes when the light turns yellow. To SLOWER a person is going the more likely it is the turn yellow approaching the intersection. So EITHER a person should STOP at every GREEN light (the only certainly legal way OR to floor it at every intersection speeding up.

As the studies show, redlight cameras dramatically increase accidents.

Bodhisattva said:

Traffic control cameras and CCTV are GREAT ideas and should stay around. Don't want a ticket? Drive safer and slow down.

Click to expand...

The government could easily require GPS and cellular to new cars black boxes, for which every traffic violation, ie criminal charge, could be mailed to each person each month - such as:

Following closer than 1 car length per 10 mph.
Parking too close or too far from a curb.
Stopping too close to a stop sign, cross walk or stop light.
Driving BELOW the minimum speed limit - such as NOT leaving the highway and parking if rush hour traffic is slower than the legal minimum.
Failing to signal when changing lanes, leaving a parking lot onto a street or entering your own driveway.
Failing to maintain proper air pressure in your tires.
Operating the vehicle if it is not meeting emission standards.
Wandering out of your lane momentarily (that actually would be 3 criminal charges, 1 for not staying in you lane and 2 for not using the turn signal out and in)
Changing lanes in front of another car not allowing at least 1 car length per 10 mph.
Not buckling your seat belt before starting your car.

If a person doesn't want tickets, they should comply with all traffic laws 100% of the time in your claim.

It would not be that much a challenge or expense to also require such government monitoring and prosecution for traffic violations for bicycles too.

TurtleDude said:

Not going to play that game. The highways in this country were designed to safely handle 70 MPH traffic. Decreasing speeds are based on revenue or in the time of Ford, "fuel conservation"

Click to expand...

Interstates were built specifically to the standard that military vehicles could travel 100 mph on them. That was the initial design parameter and military defense was the justification used by Eisenhower for the Interstate system.

For a car my wife bought me for my birthday that she is having modified in various ways, the laser jammer and radar detector system also has a redlight and speeding camera warning system. It will sound an alert for such cameras. (She also is having a "license plate flipper" installed.) :monkey

ronpaulvoter said:

Are you aware that traffic enforcement cameras are designed primarily to steal people's money rather than enhance safety?

Did you know that the yellow on many intersections on major highways is set at the minimum legal limit of three seconds--inadequate most of the time?

Did you know that cameras cause more accidents than they prevent?

Would you like to abolish any of these?

Do you have many cameras in your neighborhood?

Have you received any (or many) tickets from cameras?

Click to expand...

When did you get a ticket? How about just pay it.

joko104 said:

Interstates were built specifically to the standard that military vehicles could travel 100 mph on them. That was the initial design parameter and military defense was the justification used by Eisenhower for the Interstate system.

Click to expand...

As well as use as alternate landing strips.

Such cameras have no method of asking a person if there is a true emergency reason for driving fast.

Redress said:

And again you get your facts wrong. PolitiFact Florida | Rick Kriseman says red light cameras change driver behavior, reduce most dangerous crashes

Click to expand...

A politician making a statement does not consitute a fact.

From your own link:

"But the lengthy report omitted facts later reported by the Tampa Bay Times, such as the fact that rear-end wrecks at intersections with red light cameras jumped 44 percent and overall crashes at those intersections increased 10 percent compared to the previous year."

The "report" he cites in your link was from a "consultant.":roll:

rabbitcaebannog said:

DC made quite a bit of money off of us on our last trip. We had several tickets in the mailbox awaiting our arrival home. All were done with cameras (they showed the shots) done in the wee hours in the morning as we were arriving. I think we had a few bad turns due to being unfamiliar with the roads. One was saying we went over the speed limit which was 35 miles an hour (we were going 43) because there were virtually no cars out on the road at 3 am. I won't be going back again if I can help it. A little common sense would be nice.

Click to expand...

Sorry to hear that. Will the tickets go on your driving record?

joko104 said:

Such cameras have no method of asking a person if there is a true emergency reason for driving fast.

Click to expand...

If you have a true emergency you pull over and dial 911.

rabbitcaebannog said:

DC made quite a bit of money off of us on our last trip. We had several tickets in the mailbox awaiting our arrival home. All were done with cameras (they showed the shots) done in the wee hours in the morning as we were arriving. I think we had a few bad turns due to being unfamiliar with the roads. One was saying we went over the speed limit which was 35 miles an hour (we were going 43) because there were virtually no cars out on the road at 3 am. I won't be going back again if I can help it. A little common sense would be nice.

Click to expand...

So you got to DC and forgot how to drive?

CRUE CAB said:

If you have a true emergency you pull over and dial 911.

Click to expand...

Yeah, pull over and call 911 to send a car to take someone's body to the morgue dying while waiting for anyone to arrive in the middle of nowhere. You're another person who believes in the duty to die for government control ideologies. I would imagine by your messages on about any topic that you curse the 4th of July.

FreedomFromAll said:

The same reasoning could be used for things like 'warrantless searches dont matter if you have nothing to hide'.

Click to expand...

The Fourth Amendment covers that. It does not apply to your car.
One is a right the other a privilege.

joko104 said:

Yeah, pull over and call 911 to send a car to take someone's body to the morgue dying while waiting for anyone to arrive in the middle of nowhere. You're another person who believes in the duty to die for government control ideologies. I would imagine by your messages on about any topic that you curse the 4th of July.

Click to expand...

Your funny.
Answer me this water boy. How many people have died because the were not in a speeding car on the way to the hospital?
Show me that stat and we can talk like adults. Till then keep your opinion of me to yourself.

CRUE CAB said:

Your funny.
Answer me this water boy. How many people have died because the were not in a speeding car on the way to the hospital?
Show me that stat and we can talk like adults. Till then keep your opinion of me to yourself.

Click to expand...

^ A nonsensical question.
Show me the stats of people who died while driving 80 to 85 mph in a 70 speed limit zone on an Interstate.

joko104 said:

^ A nonsensical question.
Show me the stats of people who died while driving 80 to 85 mph in a 70 speed limit zone on an Interstate.

Click to expand...

You are the cop, look at your own stats. Easy enough.
You brought the emergency deal into it not me, so dont deflect.

CRUE CAB said:

The Fourth Amendment covers that. It does not apply to your car.
One is a right the other a privilege.

Click to expand...

They don't ticket cars and "driving is a privilege" is a slogan that is not based in law or court rulings. Overall it is a nonsensical slogan.