Bill Banning Red-Light Cameras Signed into Law

Jackson Free Press ^ | March 23, 2009

[george76]

Among the bills signed into law by Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour on Friday is House Bill 1568, which bans the use of cameras to catch motorists running red lights.

Mississippi joins at least eight other states in banning the automated technology, including neighboring Arkansas.

[DB]

That actually isn’t true.

They shorten the yellow light time so they can collect more revenue.

They do it for revenue, not safety.

[malia]

Good points, thank you both!!

[Lucky Dog]

why are they a bad idea?

Here you go…

US Constitutiton, Amendment VI

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, [emphasis added] and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

[Islander7]

why are they a bad idea?....”

Allow me to borrow your car for a few days. I’m sure you will understand then.

[bamahead]

Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!

[4yearlurker]

“If you don’t run red lights,no need to fear the cameras..”

Just don’t let any friend or relative drive you car.

[ohioman]

“If you don’t run red lights, you need not fear the cameras.”

This is not about fear of cameras. This is about Freedom.

[Travis T. OJustice]

If you don’t run red lights, you need not fear the cameras.

Not a big fan of liberty, eh? I'll bet you don't mind having your house searched by the authorities regurlarly, because you have nothing to hide, huh?

[Sloth]

Dude, tinyurl.com

[george76]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2212065/posts

[wardaddy]

good....TN has some Ninnies...Steve Cohen from Memphis was a big one..

[Still Thinking]

Yeah, I was happy to see the back end of Her Manliness as she headed for Washington (not that I’d normally enjoy seeing her backside). “Mr. Napolitano Goes to Washington”

[george76]

Constitutional rights are infringed upon by the enforcement of the camera programs.

A strong case can be made for constitutional violations on both procedural and substantive grounds.

Procedural challenges range from evidentiary matters to sufficiency of notice.

Substantive issues include the Confrontation Clause, self-incrimination, search and seizure, equal protection, and most significantly, due process, by shifting of the burden of proof to the defendant to prove non-guilt.

[Still Thinking]

If you don’t run red lights, you need not fear the cameras.

That doesn't even pass the general smell test. As a general rule I fear anything that empowers the government at the expense of their masters, including this.

But there's more than that in this case. For example, when Georgia recently passed a law intended to curb abuse of these cameras, mandating a 1-second extension of the yellow where cameras are used, violations (and the associated hazards) declined. The cities then gave the camera operating companies an ultimatum to figure out how to get violations back up again!!

[DrewsMum]

bookmark

[realpatriot]

You are using 0bama state math, right?

[elkfersupper]

If you don’t run red lights, you need not fear the cameras.

If the cameras are gone, you need not fear the cameras.