Red Light and Speed Cameras

Remove all ads!

I think there are two primary problems with the claim that it's unconstitutional. One, forensic evidence has been included for years. You can face the results of a blood test or a breathalizer test no better than the results of a camera, yet they're acceptable.

Two, the issue of innocent until proven guilty, is a little more complicated. Technically, no one has found you guilty of speeding (thus it doesn't go on your record), just your car. As you own your car, you are assumed to be responsable for what it does. I can see allowances if you can prove you involuntarily lost influence over your car (i.e. someone stole it), but arguing that your son/daughter/spouse took it and so you aren't responsable won't fly.

If you claim you're not responsable because your car was stolen or the like, that's an affirmative defense, which places the burden of proof on the defendant.

 

Yeah, but how fast can ride a bike...

So if someone commits a crime with a gun that you own, you are guilty? I thought 2nd Admendment rights advocates argued differently.

Yes, that's what I said in my post, except for the part about a car committing "a crime."

 

In the UK, if you are pulled speeding, you get a fine and 3 points.
if a camera catches you but doesnt identify you as the driver you get the fine, you own the car you should know better then lending it to someone who is going to break the law.

if your gun was used in a crime by someone else, doesnt that make you an accomplace?

 

Not that I know of, but I'm not a lawyer.

Often times, "lending" is not the issue. Making "owernship" a crime is just stupid, but a great source of income for the state.

 

It all depends on how they got the gun. If they broke into your house, no. If you gave it to them, yes. If you left it loaded on a table right in front of your unlocked front door, yes.

If you legally own a dangerous object, be it a car, a gun, or a sample of anthrax, you are responsable for it's safe keeping. There are certian reasonable measures that the courts expect you to take to ensure that the dangerous object is kept safe. If you fail to take those measures, you are partially responsable.

 

I believe you will find that those laws vary from state to state. I can find out what they are in Texas, but it will take me a little time. Also, just about any object can be a "dangerous object," that's just plain silly. For instance, a butter knife can be a dangerous object. The laws generally cover specific types of items, usually by its class, iirc.

 

the reason for punishing the owner was because everyone was claiming that they werent driving at the time, give me a break - worried about a ticket, dont lend your car to anyone.

 

I don't worry about tickets, but about how these guys are so worried about giving out tickets, but they can't keep the average citizen and his/her property safe. They have it backwards.

 

what exactly are you talking about?

 

I don't understand how anyone can be against speed cameras. Speed cameras are useless as revenue gathering devices because only morons are dumb enough to speed past one. All the intelligent people slow down, and hey presto, enforcement of the speed limit.

I agree 100%, Merlanni.

 

Anything that reduces the death toll on our highways is a good thing. If your car is photoed speeding through a red light, the odds are that you are driving it. If you'd lent it to a friend, you know that you should go to them to collect and also not lend your car to them again. If it was stolen, well, I'm pretty sure that you can get the ticket thrown out.

I've seen some pretty nasty car accidents, and I fully advocate anything that will reduce them.

 

No, not really, since most people will just pay the ticket (maybe), rather than bother with the speed limit. Some people just use them to paste onto their walls.

America is a very different country. There are people here who drive 50-60 miles a day just to get to work, so they very rarely bother with the speed limits. Also, there is not much in the way of public transportation. So as I pointed out, if the government needs more money, they can just lower the speed limit, and "presto" more money.

Typically, the average speed on the freeways, around these parts, is about 80mph in the flow of traffic. The posted speed limit is 60-65 on most of our freeways. I drive about 70 on the freeways and there are cars that pass me like I'm standing still. Texas has a horrific death toll on the freeways, and I'm sure that high speed has a lot to do with it. But a lot of it is also alcohol related. They have all kinds of laws against drunk driving and some stiff penalties, but that doesn't stop most people.

Because of all the corruption and fraud in the system, HB. Take a moment to read the article I linked, and you will see that it's not as simple as you believe. They are turnng over government accoutability to private corporations, which don't give a flip about the law or the Constitution but about the bottom line. As the article points out, these kinds of measures are often defeated when they are held to a democratic vote.

In the end for me it's a Constitutional and privacy issue. I tend to favor indvidual rights and privacy. The conformists and authoritarians will bleat about public roads, but your car is your personal "effect" and property, and as such, the Founders gave you certain -- reasonable -- protections of privacy. Nevertheless, by creating a counterforce against authoritarian rule, the hope is to create a balance somewhere in the middle between public good and individual and privacy rights. Big Brother (and it may be a private company) is watching, so be careful which rights and freedoms you are willing to give away today just for a little security.

I never knew that guilt and the law were based upon "odds." As far as loaning it to a friend, remember that other family members may drive your car as well. Also, there are always exceptions. For example, I once traded a car at a dealership and several months later recieved a parking ticket in the mail because the dealership never bothered to transfer the title of the car out of my name with the Department of Public Saftey - and then sold it to someone else. Of course, I just threw it in the trash.

 

SO, you think its ok to park your car (a private effect) infront of a school at begin or close of day, and have sex in it? knowing full well that kids will see the act? basically what youve just advocated.

another thing which is related strongly with law is intent, someone speeding knows full well that theyre willingly breaking the law.

 

Would you be ok with speeding cameras if they were run and organised by the police and or the department of roads/traffic (or whatever they are called in the US)? Just putting up a camera does wonders and well, having to identify the driver I do not understand. Fine the car and I happened to not drive it at the occasion then I would have a talk with the person who did. If he is a good enough friend that I would lend him my car he is a good enough friend to reimburse me for a speeding ticket.

 

Perhaps you missed the word REASONABLE in my statement. Unless you just felt the need to be such a drama queen....

 

It is interesting how Americans seem to always wheel out the constitution as an excuse to be allowed to do whatever they want.

If you're speeding, you're BREAKING THE LAW. The problem is not the speed camera. If you think the speed limits are too low then that's a slightly different issue to the use of the speed camera. In and of themselves, speed cameras are fantastic.

Actually, the best place for the use of speed cameras is Australia. Not sure if there are many Australians on these boards, but in Australia they have speed cameras EVERYWHERE. And, of all the countries I have ever been to, Australians are best at keeping to the speed limit. I hardly ever saw anyone speeding there. And Australians have to drive just as far as Americans do to get to work, so that's not the difference. The Australians just seem to have a lot more respect for their road rules, because they know that if they don't, they'll soon be bankrupt. It definitely works in Australia, so I don't see why it shouldn't work in USA. It doesn't work quite so well in NZ, because I don't think we have enough of them.

Give us more speed cameras!

 

Drama Queen?

Whan you watch a mother with her child in a pram be killed by someone who tried to take a corner to fast then you can tell me what is reasonable...

speeding is deadly, a car is a deadly weapon if you drive it irresponsibly then you are risking lives, speed linits are there for a reason,

I dont have a problem with the government taking money from arseholes, if you want to speed and be an arsehole be my guest... pay the fine and shut the **** up

 

More drama? Get a grip. As I pointed out to you, most people who drink and drive, don't give a flip about the laws, regardless of the penalties. Likewise, the cameras aren't really a deterrent for the worst offenders.

Most people will just pay the fine, if they feel like it, but that doesn't change a whole lot. Does it?

 

Chandos, in the end, the privacy falls apart for one simple reason. A cop in a car sitting on the side of the road could (and often do) do the same thing. If it isn't an invasion of your privacy for a cop car to watch you speed by, it isn't an invasion of privacy for a camera to do it. The privacy issue is pure BS. The constitutionality and "but it wasn't me" issue is a little more credible, but not that much.

Insofar as corruption is in the system, that should definitely be removed. Speed limits shouldn't be lowered simply for revinue, nor should private corporations be enforcing the law, but a public city or county running cameras on roads with legitimate speeds isn't an issue.

The problem here is that the outside of your car (the part with the liscense plate) isn't private. It's like saying the police don't have the right to look at what you're wearing because it's private property. That's bs. I believe the legal precedent is called 'plain view' or something.

 

It's not the police, it is a private company that's doing the looking. Second, it's not even YOU they are looking at, but the plate.