Posted on 08/18/2019 10:57:14 AM PDT by MarvinStinson
Speed and red-light cameras are the bane of many motorists. A modern idea made possible by technology, they have been installed in at least 24 states. Although these cameras are a revenue boon for governments across the nation, their intrusion into daily life is disturbing, and their constitutionality is dubious.
Specifically, use of these cameras could violate the Sixth Amendment. The Confrontation Clause grants criminal defendants the right to be confronted with the witnesses against them. Since it is a camera and not a person that witnessed the offense, such violations generally cannot be considered a criminal offense. The ticket is issued to the owner of the vehicle, not to the person driving it, leaving a lack of certainty as to the identity of the offender.
Therefore, the “ticket” in most places is nothing more than a civil fine, making enforcement and collection difficult. To date, governments have avoided this problem by requiring payment of the fine before motorists can renew their driver’s license or auto registration. Although there generally are appeals procedures, they typically do not give drivers a day in court. In other words, what happened to being innocent until proven guilty?
There are several for-profit companies that install and operate the cameras, some of them foreign-owned. In a typical arrangement, a camera company will contract with a local government to pay the capital cost of installing the cameras in exchange for a share of the revenue generated via fines. In short, governments get a new revenue stream without any operating cost, and the camera companies make a tidy profit.
The companies and government officials argue that greater safety will result from fewer accidents and that the increased government revenue will benefit the local communities.
Studies to confirm those claims have yielded mixed results. Studies paid for by the camera companies or governments usually show fewer accidents. Independent studies and those financed by opponents usually show no gains and sometimes worse results.
There is more evidence that greater public safety actually depends on the timing of yellow and red lights. Longer yellow and all-way red times have been shown to significantly reduce accidents. Sometimes local governments actually decrease yellow-light timing to catch more red-light runners, a result of the perverse financial incentives that tempt government officials and camera companies. Studies also show motorists are more likely to hit the brakes hard at camera-enforced intersections, increasing rear-end collisions.
Unsurprisingly, these cameras are deeply unpopular. Since 1991, there have been 42 elections on adopting or prohibiting either speed or red-light cameras or both. In all but two of these, voters have opposed the cameras by an average margin of 63 percent.
However, polling on the issue can show different results. A recent Public Opinion Strategies poll of 800 likely voters nationwide found 69 percent of respondents either strongly or somewhat support red-light cameras, while 29 percent somewhat or strongly oppose. Interestingly, 47 percent of those same respondents thought most of their neighbors opposed the cameras.
A possible explanation is that, as a national poll, most respondents do not live in a locality with red-light cameras since less than half the states allow them and not all jurisdictions in those states have them. Therefore, many have never experienced them. Familiarity breeds contempt.
Most citations for speed and red-light cameras are simply civil fines. The offender essentially has no recourse in court. The financial incentive creates a conflict of interest for local elected officials and camera companies to game the system in their favor. These factors can undermine citizens’ faith in government and breed mistrust.
We are brought up to respect the legal system that was handed down to us through English common law. We expect the laws to be just and fairly applied. We expect to always have recourse in the courts. And most importantly, we always expect to be treated equally before the law. Speed and red-light cameras are contrary to those expectations. This is not good for the civil society, especially at a time when distrust in government is high.
See my post before this one...
And if everyone gave up their guns, nobody would get shot. ;)
In my state, the solution to this is simple. When the light changes, both directions are red for a couple of seconds.
Why would ANYONE pay a ticket if they were innocent?
Of course, you may be more likely to fight the second one, assuming they were both bogus.
Don’t want a traffic ticket? Don’t break the law.
Go ahead and read the article. It won't hurt you.
I would understand why you’d think this was something nefarious, but I am almost 100% certain that case I mentioned involved a lazy police department who never reviewed the video as required, and a stupid employee at the private company managing the system who didn’t think to ask himself why so many violations had occurred at one place on one day.
There is a youtube crash compilation where I guy flies over a slightly blind hill and runs through a roundabout at about 80 mph. Destroys his car on all the curbs he hits. The car is a Nissan GTR.
HA! I found it. THis is how NOT to approach a traffic circle:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNOJ0R6C88Q
Net gain/loss = zero for both.
The only ones gaining are the light providers (usually half the fine) and the municipalities (more money for non-traffic related pet projects, with line the judges' pockets when the fines are contested.
My daughter got a ticket in the mail for running a red light. The picture showed her vehicle clearly stopped and brake lights on. She asked them why she got a ticket for running a red light when she clearly didn’t as shown in the picture. They told her it was because one front tire was on the white line, according to them that meant she was IN the intersection.
She paid the ticket because the process to fight them is difficult, set up to be impossible. If police officers ticketed as strictly as that, no one would tolerate it for long. That sort of enforcement is why people slam on their brakes at intersections with the cameras, because even inches of one tire into the intersection is considered running a red light. I can see why they have more rear end collisions.
“You have to slow down to enter it, and outside traffic has to yield to traffic in the roundabout”
Those are the key points. It takes a bit for everyone to become familiar with the entry / exit rules, but once they do, traffic flows pretty smoothly. With less stress...no lights
Just don’t run red or orange lights
Cameras don’t lie - you just drive too aggressively !
Best thing to do is drive slow
The system was set up to be impossible to appeal. There is no court appearance option; as the article explains these were not handled the same as if a police officer wrote you a ticket. The tickets from cameras are a civil matter so your option would be to sue. If you just refuse to pay it is considered an unpaid fee, then you cannot register the vehicle without paying and of course if you don’t get your vehicle registered it snowballs from there.
In the area I was familiar with that was doing this, the main complaint I heard was the fact that there was no way to dispute them, no way to defend yourself.
Wasn’t she sent the photograph? Most send the photograph with the violation payment invoice.
In Tennessee you can’t be forced to pay a ticket from a red light camera. They can’t ding your credit or take your Driver’s License or give you points. All they can do is send you letters and say scary sounding things. And the notices you get are all by first class mail so they have no proof you even received them.
LOL.
If they won’t stop for safety , they won’t stop for a camera
If they won’t stop for safety , they won’t stop for a camera
She described the “violation” to the car rental co., but they weren’t interested.
Maintaining a good working relationship with the rental co. was her #1 concern.
Small claims court. My guess is the ticketing town would not bother to show up.
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.