Posted on 03/21/2008 6:03:37 AM PDT by Virginia Ridgerunner
The Maryland House of Delegates voted 90 to 45 yesterday to pass the governor's speed cameras legislation, allowing police departments to install roadside cameras to ticket speeding motorists in work areas, school zones and residential neighborhoods across the state.
The Senate has passed a similar bill. If the two chambers agree on a final version, Maryland would join the District in using cameras to enforce speed limits. In Maryland, speed cameras are legal only in Montgomery County. The legislation would allow the state's 23 other jurisdictions to use the technology.
(snip)
The speed camera bill, which was proposed by Gov. Martin O'Malley (D), allows the state to install cameras in construction areas. The measure also would authorize local governments to use cameras in school zones and in residential neighborhoods with posted speed limits less than 45 mph. Violators would be fined $40 but would not get points on their licenses.
(snip)
Proponents of the bill have argued that cameras help reduce accidents and make roads safer while freeing police to fight more serious crimes. Opponents said the cameras infringe on civil liberties and have the potential to be abused by police departments trying to increase revenue by setting up speed traps.
"This is a slippery slope about our civil liberties that I take very seriously," said House Minority Whip Christopher B. Shank (R-Washington). "In this legislation, an unmanned box takes the place of a police officer. Face-to-face confrontation is lost."
(snip)
In a heated debate on the House floor Tuesday, some lawmakers questioned whether the government is enacting too many restrictions on society. Del. Patrick L. McDonough (R-Baltimore County) said the bill and other legislation introduced to regulate driving "seeks to criminalize so many aspects of our lives."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I’m sure that the speed camera will chase down a car doing 90 MPH to prevent fatalities while the cops are downing donuts.
They used these cameras in Utah for a while. They end up earning a lot of money for the contractor but none for the cities when all is said and done. The State legislature ended up banning them, except in school zones, after all the stories about the false tickets and bureaucratic incompetence started rolling in.
What will become of rogue police officers who refuse to pay the tickets they get?
This is a topic that came up on a Corvette entuhiast’s forum the other day. Actually, it was involving red light cameras but speed cameras came into the debate.
Mind you, this is a forum frequented by people who like to drive sports cars. It ran about 55% - 45% people in favor of the cameras. Americans are willing to trade almost any freedom for “safety”.
I am very discouraged.
Maryland “Freak State” PING!
Amazing how fast liberals will sell out civil liberties when it means making money. No to wiretapping terrorists; yes to red light cameras.
She's lying. If her cause was really safety (instead of money) she would advocate speed limits of 20 mph everywhere and fines of $5,000 minimally and loss of vehicle for any excess speed. But instead she favors a $40 license to speed.
Is this Guy a RINO? These cameras have caught kidnappers, drug dealers and a host of other criminals and this guy is off in left field?
Maryland should just use the “what-did-you-make-send-it-in” tax form.
Then the pols wouldn’t have to waste time dreaming up new revenue streams.
Or Senators, Representatives, Excutive department wonks, judges, illegal aliens with no registration/address?
Imagine how many rapists and criminals you could catch if you arrested every American. Period.
“Is this Guy a RINO? These cameras have caught kidnappers, drug dealers and a host of other criminals and this guy is off in left field?”
I seriously doubt that “the cameras” caught anyone: the cops did.
IMHO there is a difference. I don’t care for the idea of surveillance cameras that catch everything. But a camera that only captures an act of lawbreaking; sorry, no one has a ‘right’ to run a red light.
“IMHO there is a difference. I don’t care for the idea of surveillance cameras that catch everything. But a camera that only captures an act of lawbreaking; sorry, no one has a ‘right’ to run a red light.”
Agreed. But to me it’s the slippery slope. I have no problem with red light only cameras. But the same tech can be used to monitor speed. And once you get people used to the red light cameras, what’s the harm in speed cameras right? I mean, no one has a right to speed? And you would be safer, don’t you want to be safe? It’s for the children!
Seriously, if there were a strongly worded law limiting these things to red light enforcement only, I’d be ok with that.
Cameras plus automatic enforcement are terrible ideas, no matter the circumstance.
Where is your due process? Good luck taking that picture to court.
Welcome to O’Malleyland - Where if you can dream it, we can tax it......Maryland, one sorry excuse after another as the dims keep the new taxes coming
Red light cameras and now speed cameras are another way to control the sheeple and raise taxes in the form of fines.
Hello!!!!!
This IS about speed cameras, not red light cameras!
The real issue about cameras used for law enforcement is malfeasance and incompetence. Government cannot seem to get cameras calibrated properly, and cannot resist the opportunity to cheat.
I expect the speed cameras to be like red light cameras. It's all a civil matter. The state asks you to pay up, but has no way to force payment. They keep threatening to sue people, but I don't know if they ever have.
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.