You reduce corruption by reducing government functions. There is a one-to-one relationship.
Exactly. And that is what I try to do
OK. So when the light goes from green to yellow to red in five seconds on a road with a 50 mph speed limit you won't mind paying a $500 fine and seeing your insurance go up for three years?
'Cause... why again?
As Hoppe observes in Democracy, the God that Failed, it is in the nature of all governments, regardless of their type, to continually seek to increase revenues while simultaneously decreasing their level of actual service.
It’s easy to find a principled reason to oppose them: they increase collisions and create opportunity for corruption on a large scale. The supposed reason for their implementation is belied by the facts. Increasing yellow light times has been proven to decrease traffic accidents without any expense.
Here in Florida, it is especially bad because they design the systems to fleece tourists and commuters. The majority of municipalities that implement cameras decrease yellow light timing to increase revenue. Many also outlaw right turns on red. Both of these actions increase revenue at the cost of safety and congestion. It is outright fraud by both the government and the companies that produce the camera systems. How can you not oppose it?
It’s basically a TOLLING SYSTEM that feeds on people driving safely and normally, but making “technical mistakes”, such as stopping just over the line, or not quite getting to full stop before turning right.
I watched an intersection in Los Angeles (Sepulveda and Victory Blvd, in the Valley) for several hours, back when they were in force, and I saw the flashes (from all different directions - I counted 7 cameras at that intersection, and I think it was only for North/South traffic) and I saw the reactions of the drivers (some even tried to roll back). They knew they were out $500 for going a foot over the line, and they weren’t happy about it.
So how about taking away the money angle? If they help safety so much, then the cities should put up the cameras and then assess driver license points for each violation (with some maximum, maybe one point per month). Then people would get punished, but politicians wouldn’t be lining their pockets with their hidden tolls. A few of those tickets and they watch their insurance zoom up...a few more and their license goes bye-bye.
...of course that will never happen, as that is not the point of the cameras...which is my point.
“I don’t like cameras either but I have a difficult time in principle finding a reason to oppose them.”
I have the right to confront my accuser in court. In this case I do not. Enough principle for any American.
The biggest problem is that motorists who are ticketed through these cameras aren't treated like any other motorist who is cited for a motor vehicle violation. In a red-light camera case, the private company that runs the cameras is, in effect, the plaintiff in a legal action against the motorist. That's why the ticket is sent from the private company, and that's why a company representative has to show up in court if a motorist contests the charge. The local police may sign an affidavit certifying the accuracy of the camera and the identity of the vehicle's owner, but unlike a typical motor vehicle offense the local police are not the "complainant" if the case goes to court.
I can't think of any other situation where a municipal government would take it upon itself to hand over its law enforcement duties to an outside party like this. That is the most principled argument that can be made against these red-light cameras.
As noted by so many, they make that difficult with their cameras. When you set up a camera, one would think they wouldn't be in zones that are so slow that such a rate of speed is hard to keep without constant attention. Create a 20 to 25 mph zone, allow only 3 mph or less flex, and you have made a situation that is bordering on the difficult for drivers to actually handle, even if they do have good intent.
And quick yellow light times is another issue, and the rolling stop into a right turn. Then there are the flat out speed traps, setting a complete slowdown at the bottom of a hill from a previously much higher speed.
These are fund-raising devices. And to be honest with you, there's real problem with simply getting a ticket in the mail that says you were speeding on a freeway during rush hour with hundreds of cars around you at some point a few weeks earlier. How do you respond to that, and especially if it's just a few mph over the limit?
Were you? You don't know. You don't remember. Was it your car? Who knows really?
But it would be awful easy just to take a bunch of pictures and send them a letter demanding cash.
The Mafia probably aches that they didn't come up with this first.