Speeding Cameras

[BrandonT858]

[/ QUOTE ]A breathalyzer in every car is very different, just like a camera in your car or house would be different. Just so you know, I would be opposed to UK-style CCTV cameras on every street corner. But cameras operated by human beings aren't really a huge expansion in law enforcement efficiency.

[/ QUOTE ]

Surely a breathlizer will save more lives than a van parked taking pictures of speeders. I would like to see some statistics on how these cameras are making our roads "safer." And think back 10 years ago and then to present day, and tell me you do not think that we are going to have cameras on every corner and street in the next 10 years.

[BrandonT858]

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]


[/ QUOTE ]A breathalyzer in every car is very different, just like a camera in your car or house would be different. Just so you know, I would be opposed to UK-style CCTV cameras on every street corner. But cameras operated by human beings aren't really a huge expansion in law enforcement efficiency.

[/ QUOTE ]

Surely a breathlizer will save more lives than a van parked taking pictures of speeders. I would like to see some statistics on how these cameras are making our roads "safer." And think back 10 years ago and then to present day, and tell me you do not think that we are going to have cameras on every corner and street in the next 10 years.

[/ QUOTE ]


I remember about 8 years ago, they talked about installing stop-light cameras at intersections, and there was the same sort of, "Oh no, slippery slope, big brother in 10 years" talk. If someone tries to put CCTVs on every street corner, then I'll oppose it. If they want to have people take pictures of speeders and ticket them, more power to them.

[AzDesertRat]

Speed doesn't kill--different speeds of drivers is what creates dangerous conditions. Perhaps if slower drivers drove in the right hand lanes, it would create safer conditions for all drivers. All cameras do is make people slow down for the cameras and then speed right back up. People actually literally slam on their brakes when they get to the cameras and then speed back up when the camera range is gone---how does that make driving safer?

I will never get caught by a camera because I have taken precautions with a license plate cover and I am not that stupid (actually--a good idea would be to start selling these things to motorists out here). Hey if governments want to make money off of this, why not individuals like myself?

[BrandonT858]

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?

[Skidoo]

[ 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.

[TomCollins]

[ 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.

[Dan.]

[ 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.

[Meech]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
(I'm opposed to this type of big brother monitoring, fwiw.)

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you equally opposed to a casino's security cameras?

[/ QUOTE ]

private -vs- public

[/ QUOTE ]

Without arguing the legitimacy of taxation or the government: you're opposed to: the public--through tax dollars--building a road, then the public--through the government--deciding that there should be a maximum speed on these roads, and then finally the public--through tax dollars again--paying someone to enforce those rules. Is that correct?

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't say all that.

I'm against the government spying on me.

If speeding is the danger that they portray it to be, wouldn't safety dictate stopping the person while they are speeding?

This has nothing, nothing to do with safety. This is a cheap way to seperate me from even more of my heard earned dollars.

And lets face it, the public has about zero influence on speed limits.

[AlexM]

[ QUOTE ]
We as tax payers pay for the roads and I feel that cops should not be able ticket citizens by posting up cameras in unsuspecting areas.

[/ 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.