|
|
#81
03-01-2007, 04:40 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Speeding Cameras
[ QUOTE ]
I guess I'm still unclear as to this mentality. Elwood probably brought up the best point, being that the camera may not show the driver in which case the owner of the car has to prove it wasn't him driving. But if the cameras that catch you running a red light can take a picture of the driver, why can't these speedtrap cameras do the same? And if these cameras could take a picture of the driver, how is this any different than a police car hiding with the radar gun out? It seems that most here don't have trouble with the laws regarding the speed limit, so why the reaction to enforcing those laws? For the ACists, pretend that I'm talking about a private road with private enforcement because that would be my ideal scenario. [/ QUOTE ] we don't need government up our rearends raping us like this and we don't need joe private road owner doing this either. This is simply another method of forced tax collection and not public safety in the vast majority of cases. 
|
|
#82
03-01-2007, 04:42 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Speeding Cameras
[ QUOTE ]
"If you're not doing anything wrong you should have nothing to hide." [/ QUOTE ] Anybody who utters these words does not deserve the freedoms our founding fathers envisioned. You will make a fine Commedant in a future Peoples Republic of Ammerikka!
|
|
#83
03-01-2007, 04:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Speeding Cameras
Unfortunately our government has been held accountable for almost nothing since Nixon.
|
|
#84
03-01-2007, 04:43 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Speeding Cameras
[ QUOTE ]
What is the difference, if anything CCTVs will stop more serious crimes such as robbery's, assault, drug dealing etc... It is a slippery slope. If you can justify taking pictures of speeders, then how do you support protecting other criminals from being monitored on the streets? [/ QUOTE ] Well, for one thing, CCTVs have infinitely more potential for nefarious use than speeding cameras.
|
|
#85
03-01-2007, 04:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Speeding Cameras
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] I guess I'm still unclear as to this mentality. Elwood probably brought up the best point, being that the camera may not show the driver in which case the owner of the car has to prove it wasn't him driving. But if the cameras that catch you running a red light can take a picture of the driver, why can't these speedtrap cameras do the same? And if these cameras could take a picture of the driver, how is this any different than a police car hiding with the radar gun out? It seems that most here don't have trouble with the laws regarding the speed limit, so why the reaction to enforcing those laws? For the ACists, pretend that I'm talking about a private road with private enforcement because that would be my ideal scenario. [/ QUOTE ] we don't need government up our rearends raping us like this and we don't need joe private road owner doing this either. This is simply another method of forced tax collection and not public safety in the vast majority of cases. [/ QUOTE ] Collecting taxes (fines) from lawbreakers. Excuse me if I don't show much sympathy for your "right" to break the rules. Why is this so egregious but the highway patrol car on the side of the road with the radar gun is ok? And if that's not ok, is any enforcement of the speed limit ok?
|
|
#86
03-01-2007, 04:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Speeding Cameras
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] What is the difference, if anything CCTVs will stop more serious crimes such as robbery's, assault, drug dealing etc... It is a slippery slope. If you can justify taking pictures of speeders, then how do you support protecting other criminals from being monitored on the streets? [/ QUOTE ] Well, for one thing, CCTVs have infinitely more potential for nefarious use than speeding cameras. [/ QUOTE ] Care to explain? Also how are they not in the same category but on different degrees?
|
|
#87
03-01-2007, 04:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Speeding Cameras
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] Why in the world not? You're engaging in behavior that the owners of the roads have decided is unsafe. If you don't like it, find someone else to own the roads. [/ QUOTE ] LOL I am assume you feel it is safe to drive 65 in all lanes of the highway. Like someone else mentioned these cameras just force people to slam on brakes and people just speed up right after the camera. I am all for keeping the roads safe, but come on guys having the police take a picture and then send it to you saying you were speeding is just BS. These cameras don't do anything but generate revenue and do not protect the roads. Our rights our being taken away one by one and I feel that complying with this type of law enforcement will only help in the reduction of our freedoms in the future. [/ QUOTE ] Exactly. IMO this is an infringement upon the right for civil humans to be left alone. I drive every day and very, very rarely see someone driving recklessly/unsafely. This is simply a way to further milk us of our freedom (money and privacy and diginity).
|
|
#88
03-01-2007, 04:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Speeding Cameras
[ QUOTE ]
Why is this so egregious but the highway patrol car on the side of the road with the radar gun is ok? And if that's not ok, is any enforcement of the speed limit ok? [/ QUOTE ] How about my right to face my accuser?
|
|
#89
03-01-2007, 04:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Speeding Cameras
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Bringing up good points, but if they got a picture of you and you are the owner... [/ QUOTE ] It's the "picture of you" part that's the problem. When a cop pulls you over, they have his first person testimony and your own signature taken at the scene to establish that it was you. With these cameras, all they have is a snapshot of someone who looks like you. No first person testimony. No signature. [/ QUOTE ] Yeah, if you murder someone and they have a security camera that catches you do it, this is pretty much worthless in court. All they have is a picture of a person that looks like you and no first person testimony (WHICH IS ACTUALLY LESS RELIABLE THAN A LOT OF THINGS), or a signature. [/ QUOTE ] What's with using uppercase letters in lieu of logical argument? How old are you, 15? First person testimony is foundational to the legal system. In fact, the output of a device is only as good as the testimony of a competent technician establishing it's proper function (in the hands of a good defense). That is why an expert witness can be called to discount such evidence. If all they have is a snapshot of a murder taken with one of these cameras and zero else, it would be pretty close to worthless.
|
|
#90
03-01-2007, 04:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Speeding Cameras
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Bringing up good points, but if they got a picture of you and you are the owner... [/ QUOTE ] It's the "picture of you" part that's the problem. When a cop pulls you over, they have his first person testimony and your signature taken at the scene to establish that it was you. With these cameras, all they have is a snapshot of someone who looks like you. No first person testimony. No signature. [/ QUOTE ] Are you not allowed to contest the picture? That would seem like the standard procedure to me. [/ QUOTE ] Sure you can contest it. In fact, who says it's you to begin with? Let the government make its case.
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
