Lawmaker burns traffic camera ticket, urges Tennesseans to ignore them

The Knoxville News Sentinel ^ | May 27, 2016 | Tom Humphrey

[bicyclerepair]

FL changed the law making “meeting your accuser” a moot point. Don’t know the details.

[SaxxonWoods]

I know a guy in Denver, CO who says he’s thrown away a dozen camera tickets and never heard a thing. Denver doesn’t pursue people or issue warrants for camera tickets apparently. They just bank whatever money comes in. That’s smart as it probably saves them money.

Unless this guy has a bunch of outstanding warrants and doesn’t know it yet, heh.

[Trump20162020]

Pretty much. These local governments are banking on your ignorance, that you’ll just mindlessly send them your cash without a word of protest.

[Texas Eagle]

Ah. So, in Florida, The Constitution is more of a set of guidelines than a set of hard and fast rules, eh?

[SeeSharp]

They can’t do anything in Tennessee if you ignore it

Right. That was my point. The way they get you is by identifying you if you show up to fight it. By just ignoring it you leave them with no option because they don't know who was driving.

[zaxtres]

Here is a link to Chicago’s increased rear-end collision due to red light cameras.

http://time.com/3643077/red-light-cams-rear-end-collisions-chicago/

However a traffic camera sitting along side the road is different as it only monitors speed. Another revenue generator as in one NC town wrote tickets out for anyone driving over the speed limit. Normally a police officer might give someone the benefit of the doubt up to 5MPH over the speed limit but not in the case of the traffic camera.

[SeeSharp]

Baltimore county MD had to pay back several hundred thousand dollars because the sworn officer who attested to the tickets personally had been dead for 6 months.

Let me guess. He was a Democrat and someone was still collecting his paycheck.

Hamsterdam.

[Autonomous User]

They told me you were nuttier than a port-a-potty at a peanut festival. I guess they was right.

[Vendome]

Yuh can’t just ignore them.

You have to challenge their constitutionally

[cyclotic]

Without a doubt

[gunnut]

In most jurisdictions, the officer is not required to appear.

[TexasGator]

"They told me you were nuttier than a port-a-potty at a peanut festival. I guess they was right."

'they' in the singular is used by the liberals to denote one who doesn't know what gender they are.

[TexasGator]

“FL changed the law making “meeting your accuser” a moot point. Don’t know the details.”

It is not a traffic ticket. It is a fine.

[piroque]

A police officer reviews footage that the camera company refers to him and he writes the ticket. He will also be the one testifying against you in court. And yes, they can make it stick.

You need to back up on that .it's been provided in court that the cameras will not hold up .

[imardmd1]

The person viewing the red light camera footage is not an eye-witness, and therefore cannot judge the mitigating circumstances affecting the issuance of the citation. Right now, the City of Wilmington, Delaware is having to pay back the fine monies wrested from vehicle owners, 6,700 instances of $110 each, which amounts to about $800,000 when the intimidating superfee for court costs has been also taken from those who choose to contest the citatyion should they lose when the case is heard. Here is the link from the News Journal front page headline:

Wilmington ignored red-light camera law under Williams (click here).

(Appeared in Thursday March 23, 2017 issue.)

Even at this moment, I am contesting an illegitimate citation based on my turning left from a one-way sreet to another crossing it, where the citation shows that my vehicle was photographed while stopped before lawfully entering the intersection, the speed entered as a double hyphen (no speed recorded). Remember now, some $400,00 of the fine money has already been given tyo the private corporation owning the camera apparatus, and who send their technicians to the court to testify against the cited vehicle owner.

The citation intimidates the owner by charging an additional $35, doubtlessly to affray the cost of having the technicians present to rebut the owner's attempt to contest the citation. When you read this article, you will see that the city has already been ordered to cease citing such right hand turns (or left hand when a one-way into another one-way street crossing it) as being classed as a "rolling stop" if it is claimed that the vehicle has not been brought to a fully complete stop before resuming motion.

So, how does the camera "know" that a safe maneuver has or has not been executed? In my case, the bumper had not crossed the stop line, the tail lights were extra bright showing that the brakes were applied, and in the succeeding image of two secondas later, there was no visible traffic shown on the crossing stree as my vehicle was turning into the roadway and proceeding.

To me, this really defines what "egregious" really means in using these entrapment devices to improve the (failing) city government's economics. They lose: $800,000 back to the owners, plus I suppose an additional $400,000 already forked over to the recording company for the images ans the billing. I doubt if that would be recoverable. The private company only does what the city pays them to do. Right or wrong is outside the contractor's purview, eh?

[imardmd1]

I’ve heard of studies, . . .

My FRiend, I don't think that porch dog is going to hunt.

In the article cited in my post #55, the red light cameras caused the overall number of crashes (whether taillight or T-bone) at the intersections they are installed on have diminished over 24% in one year. Like it or not, fair or not, they are effective. And perhaps there is also a ripple effect to surrounding intersections, even though they are not "camera-ready." Causes the drivers to be a bit more alert and cautious, eh?

[antidisestablishment]

Florida issues a "notice of violation" for $158. If you decide to fight it or don't pay the fine, they issue a ticket for $262. Then you must appear in the municipality that issued the ticket. Your odds of winning are, not surprisingly, extremely low.

Last week, the FL house passed a bill outlawing RLCs, but the Senate is owned by the companies and will not pass it. The latest report showed RLCs have empirically increased accidents. My anecdotal experience shows a dangerous 50/50 mix of drivers slamming on brakes or flooring it to try to make it through intersections before the light turns red.

Studies have proven repeatedly that the most effective way to reduce accidents is to increase yellow light times. Many municipalities have done the opposite to try to increase revenues. If it continues, expect to see vigilante groups such as they have in Britain: