Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Photo Radar Snapping Shots of Speeders (freeway speeders)
Channel 5 News ^ | 23 Jan 2006 | Unattributed

Posted on 01/23/2006 11:10:33 AM PST by Ben Mugged

Photo radar enforcement on the Loop 101 is underway with the start of this workweek.

In the first 24 hours since the cameras started snapping photos of drivers going 76 miles per hour and faster, there were more than 2,000 flashes along the freeway.

Warnings will be going out to drivers for the next 30 days. Tickets will start being sent to speeders starting at the end of February.

Scottsdale is believed to have the first digital speed enforcement in effect in the nation. If this nine-month test is successful, the city's photo radar system could become a model for the entire country.

(Excerpt) Read more at kpho.com ...


TOPICS: Local News
KEYWORDS: cameraenforcement; speeders
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last
To: Antonello

What they need to do is have cops look for the worst speeders. These are the folks who tend to weave around traffic and tailgate. Going 15 mph over an average speed of 70 is more dangerous than somone going 55. But both cause flow disruptions. The best thing to do is try and encourage a smooth, steady flow of traffic at a consisent speed safe for a given highway's design and load.


21 posted on 01/23/2006 12:05:39 PM PST by dirtboy (My new years resolution is to quit using taglines...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Antonello

For one thing, the video tape of the killings won't be the only evidence in that crime. Here, the picture would be. But, yes, the video itself isn't self authenticating, and would require testimony. Besides, the video has inherent chain of custody and is analog rather than digital in origin. There will be multiple people testifying to the tape -- the police officer, the video tech, etc.

The City isn't going to bring in the picture tech in all disputed cases. If they do, he won't have time to be a tech.


22 posted on 01/23/2006 12:05:44 PM PST by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Fierce Allegiance
If they wanted, they could do the same thing using your toll transponders like FASTPASS or EZ-Pass. It will not be long beofre they do this

That's the main reason why I won't get one of those. I'm just waiting for some deranged legislator to decide to retroactively issue speeding tickets from the calculated speed off of EZ-Pass.

23 posted on 01/23/2006 12:07:14 PM PST by dirtboy (My new years resolution is to quit using taglines...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

It won't be long before you can't use the toll roads without one, and then all roads will become toll roads.

In Mass, when they started using this, they quickly shut down most of the laanes where you could pay cash, so most people quickly went for the transponders.


24 posted on 01/23/2006 12:09:41 PM PST by Fierce Allegiance (Rapidly nearing the third quarter of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Fierce Allegiance
In Mass, when they started using this, they quickly shut down most of the laanes where you could pay cash, so most people quickly went for the transponders.

I'll wait. It adds all of two minutes to my commute on a typical day.

25 posted on 01/23/2006 12:14:25 PM PST by dirtboy (My new years resolution is to quit using taglines...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Ben Mugged

26 posted on 01/23/2006 12:14:54 PM PST by HOTTIEBOY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy
>So would a variation in the speed of traffic flow going
>from, say, 65 to 85 and back to 65 would be more
>dangerous than if everyone stayed at 70 for the
>entire stretch?

Generally, yes. And sudden speed changes (such as in a response to a speeding camera flashing) are the most dangerous.

The part of the 101 being monitored is notorious for being a spot of high variation in traffic flow speed. It seems that making it unpleasant for drivers to allow themselves to make such a large upper variation in their speed at the downhill spot would be in agreement with your reasoning.

And regarding the sudden variation due to the flashes, how would this differ from a speeder panic-braking upon seeing a DPS cruiser patrolling for speeders?

27 posted on 01/23/2006 12:16:04 PM PST by Antonello (Oh my God, don't shoot the banana!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: dirtboy

I currently have an 8 minute commute, no toll roads. One big reason I took this job.


28 posted on 01/23/2006 12:22:22 PM PST by Fierce Allegiance (Rapidly nearing the third quarter of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: All

Just another reason to keep the truck off Wreck 101.


29 posted on 01/23/2006 12:24:02 PM PST by AZ_Cowboy ("There they go again...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 1L
The City isn't going to bring in the picture tech in all disputed cases. If they do, he won't have time to be a tech.

I am sure this will be challenged once the tickets start getting mailed out. I expect the city will actually pull out all stops regarding video techs, equipment certifiers, etc. to make the first few cases. If they win those, then their precedent will likely make it simply a matter of presenting the calibration records of the system and the custody records of the video in court to prove the prosecution's case.

30 posted on 01/23/2006 12:25:32 PM PST by Antonello (Oh my God, don't shoot the banana!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Fierce Allegiance

More likely, they'll put wireless diagnostics into the cars. Then they can tax you on your odometer, fine you for speeding 24/7, and shut your car off if they want to.


31 posted on 01/23/2006 12:31:24 PM PST by AZ_Cowboy ("There they go again...")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Ben Mugged

It just isn't that hard to obey speed laws.


32 posted on 01/23/2006 12:33:11 PM PST by aimhigh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AZ_Cowboy

All this is coming. Herd us like cattle into the rail car.

Orwell was right.


33 posted on 01/23/2006 12:33:28 PM PST by Fierce Allegiance (Rapidly nearing the third quarter of life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: AZ_Cowboy
More likely, they'll put wireless diagnostics into the cars. Then they can tax you on your odometer, fine you for speeding 24/7, and shut your car off if they want to.

You do realize some cars already have black boxes, right? Of course, in order for law enforcement to get the data from them they would need a court order - they can't just arbitrarily grab info from your personal property without due process. To do so would be unconstitutional.

But gathering information by taking pictures and monitoring speed on a public highway doesn't track anything you aren't exposing to the public eye already, so does not violate any constitutional rights.

34 posted on 01/23/2006 12:46:30 PM PST by Antonello (Oh my God, don't shoot the banana!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Antonello

Who's going to answer the question of "does that picture ACCURATELY depict the actual events it shows?" and the follow up, "how do you know?"

At some point a conviction will be challeneged and an appeals court will rule on the evidence.


35 posted on 01/23/2006 1:19:09 PM PST by 1L
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: randog
www.photoblocker.com
36 posted on 01/23/2006 1:27:06 PM PST by RIGHT IN LAS VEGAS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: 1L
Who's going to answer the question of "does that picture ACCURATELY depict the actual events it shows?" and the follow up, "how do you know?"

At some point a conviction will be challeneged and an appeals court will rule on the evidence.

For the first few cases, I would imagine the city's witness lists would include members of the engineering, design, calibration, and testing teams. Backed up with the records and data developed during the installation, test, and maintenance phases of operation.

Once precedence has been set that the calibration and chain of custody records reflect the veracity of prior expert testimony any new affirmative defenses challenging the photo evidence will have to be based on novel reasons why it is invalid or they will be dismissed as already answered without the need of the time and expense of an expansive witness list for every case.

37 posted on 01/23/2006 1:37:40 PM PST by Antonello (Oh my God, don't shoot the banana!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Antonello
"Just out of curiosity - can anyone give me a logical reason why this might be considered an invasion of privacy or otherwise unconstitutional?"

I don't know if I can, but while we shouldn't break the law, our government shouldn't have total power either, which this approaches, IMO.

38 posted on 01/23/2006 1:42:00 PM PST by Sam Cree (absolute reality) - ("Reality is merely an illusion, albeit a very persistent one." Albert Einstein)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: randog

http://www.photoradarspray.ca/

http://www.jammerstore.com/p_anti_photo.htm

There's more, just goole it.

But, remember, it takes a photo of the inside of the vehicle too. Wear a gorilla mask.


39 posted on 01/23/2006 1:46:54 PM PST by Loud Mime (Republicans protect Americans from terrorists, Democrats protect terrorists from Americans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Sam Cree
I don't know if I can, but while we shouldn't break the law, our government shouldn't have total power either, which this approaches, IMO.

If, hypothetically, the city's solution involved increasing the number of police patrols looking for speeders would your argument be the same? How about if the increase was so great as to ensure all speeders would be caught 24/7? Or would you then protest that having too many police on duty approaches total power for the government?

40 posted on 01/23/2006 1:48:18 PM PST by Antonello (Oh my God, don't shoot the banana!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-50 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson