Speeding Cameras

[andyfox]

The police also use radar. Would you be against that too?

I don't understand what difference it makes if they use a camera or radar or any other electronic aid in determining whether a person is speeding. Here in the L.A. area, they've installed cameras at key intersections to see if people run red lights. If you enter the intersection after the signal turns red, the camera takes a picture of you and your license plate.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Getting rid of publicly funded roads and letting the free market do it's thing is sounding better now isn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because there's nothing stopping the private owner of a road from taking your picture from a van and issuing you a citation if he deems your driving inappropriate. Yep. Privatization fixes everything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would any ACist consider this a problem? If I own a dance club and I say you have to wear a pink shirt to enter, this might be considered unreasonable by some, but if enough people thought this, I would go out of business.

[TomCollins]

I prefer speed limits to an officer subjectively and arbitrarily judging an "unsafe" speed. I also agree that speed limits are usually too low. If they were raised, and a lower tolerance for speeding was enforced (no bs 7mph rule) that was objective, I don't see the problem.

[andyfox]

Speeding tickets might have an element of scam in them, but they are also about public safety. My son was ticketed for going 69 in a 25 zone. That ticket was not a scam.

[Dan.]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Getting rid of publicly funded roads and letting the free market do it's thing is sounding better now isn't it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because there's nothing stopping the private owner of a road from taking your picture from a van and issuing you a citation if he deems your driving inappropriate. Yep. Privatization fixes everything.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why would any ACist consider this a problem?

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say it was a problem, but it's the same situation about which the OP was complaining, and shake seemed to suggest would be "fixed" with private roads.

[MelchyBeau]

You reminded me of this clip from Monty Python's Holy Grail

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9cxWYR0HAwE

Help Help, I'm being repressed!

[andyfox]

"I think it is often safer to be driving 5-10 mph faster than the speed limit."

I think it is often safer to be driving under the influence of alcohol. Makes me calmer and less prone to road rage. I know best what laws I can violate with impunity.

[AzDesertRat]

Try living in Arizona--we have them on a stretch of freeway going through Scottsdale in addition to the cameras at red lights and vans. Rumor is they want to try to put them on ALL of Arizona's freeways through a referendum next year.

A huge problem IMO as this is driven by revenues not safety and is a pet peeve of mine. I follow a site/blog called thenewspaper.com and it follows the topic very closely. I bought a license cover for $25 and that keeps me insulated from the tickets, but still pi$$es me off. Police should be around for public safety NOT as a revenue source. [img]/images/graemlins/mad.gif[/img]

[elwoodblues]

[ QUOTE ]
I was wondering why as tax payers we do not get to Vote and decide whether or not we want cameras enforcing speed?

[/ QUOTE ]

What makes you think that you can't get a law proposed that disallows traffic cameras like this? You don't have a right to directly vote on every decision made (we live in a representative democracy, not a direct one), but there is absolutely nothing that would disallow a bill being introduced, voted on and passed that would ban robocops.

A couple of problems with the traffic cams (as I see them):

1) it makes unfair assumptions as to who the actual driver of the vehicle is at the time of the violation. Essentially, the burden is shifted to the owner to prove that they were not the driver. This is, in my opinion, an inappropriate burden-shifting. The state should have to prove All elements of the crime/offense (in particular that the defendant actually committed the crime)

2) It takes away police discretion. This can be both a good and bad thing. Police discretion can certainly lead to abuse. However, there are many instances where a "warning" does the job as good/better than a ticket or where the totality of the circumstances do not warrant issuance of a ticket in the first place (i.e. driving to the hospital.)

[Edge34]

I just want to make sure I'm reading this right:

Are people actually complaining about being caught openly breaking the law? I can understand disagreeing with the law itself, but complaining when you get caught OPENLY VIOLATING IT? Amazing.