Photo radar & speed cameras: Are they in your town? (pic)

[guids]

get 2 liscene plate frames of your choice, and a piece of clear fiberglass cut to the size of a plate, and a piece of custom polarized lense cut to the shape of the plate. install 2 small actuators, using the battery, and a relay/switch into the car car. Put the fiber glass over the plate, then install your actuators, and than the lense, and than the plate frame to hide everything, dont screw the pottom in, and use a robber stopper on the top two screws. when you hit the actuators, it tilts your frame at an angle that completely blacks out your plate, and when you turn them off the polarizing lens goes back to transparancy.

[icepick]

[ QUOTE ]
So? The camera/ticketing/billing company handles the technology and what-not so the police can do their thing. It would be silly for the police to devote their own resources towards running traffic cameras when they can hire a 3rd party to do it.

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't see a problem with a company that makes more money by giving more tickets?

[rjoefish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My main problem with these is that they're run by a for profit company.

It's essentially free money for the police. The company owns, installs, maintains the cameras. They handle the ticketing and billing.


They deduct a "small" monthy fee, rent on the cameras, and write a check to the police.

Everyone wins here but the people.

[/ QUOTE ]

This guy is absolutely spot on. As was Boris'. I am totally fine with red light cameras, but speeding cameras make me want to fly to scottsdale and bring a chainsaw.

Also, while Sucker is right about the cameras just being a cash grab for businesses, we should think that police who sit behind a bush catching speeders all day are pretty much just a cash grab without a care in the world for actual safety.

Also, a private company writing us tickets is CERTAINLY unconstitutional. What is the path of appeals against a private company who only wants money?

[/ QUOTE ]

These posts aren't exactly accurate. The company has a couple options for the cities. In Davenport, Iowa, the police department isn't paying for the cameras. The city public works department is, ie. the street department, the people handling lights and signals. The options they offer are a leasing system, where the company takes x% of the revenue, and the other is an out right install/buy option. So some cities probably buy them outright and the company is no longer involved, other than scanning the pictures service they provide. Also, the private company does not write any tickets. They screen the pictures that get taken and sent to them, then they figure out which they think are actual violations and send them back to the city, who then issues the citations. I hope no one is silly enough to believe any city is leasing out the right to issue tickets to citizens, as that would never stand up in a court.

[thedustbustr]

[ QUOTE ]
get 2 liscene plate frames of your choice, and a piece of clear fiberglass cut to the size of a plate, and a piece of custom polarized lense cut to the shape of the plate. install 2 small actuators, using the battery, and a relay/switch into the car car. Put the fiber glass over the plate, then install your actuators, and than the lense, and than the plate frame to hide everything, dont screw the pottom in, and use a robber stopper on the top two screws. when you hit the actuators, it tilts your frame at an angle that completely blacks out your plate, and when you turn them off the polarizing lens goes back to transparancy.

[/ QUOTE ]
put this into an easy to install product and i'll buy it.

[guids]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
get 2 liscene plate frames of your choice, and a piece of clear fiberglass cut to the size of a plate, and a piece of custom polarized lense cut to the shape of the plate. install 2 small actuators, using the battery, and a relay/switch into the car car. Put the fiber glass over the plate, then install your actuators, and than the lense, and than the plate frame to hide everything, dont screw the pottom in, and use a robber stopper on the top two screws. when you hit the actuators, it tilts your frame at an angle that completely blacks out your plate, and when you turn them off the polarizing lens goes back to transparancy.

[/ QUOTE ]
put this into an easy to install product and i'll buy it.

[/ QUOTE ]

we had actually thought about this, but didnt know the legality. they will soon be coming out with transparent LCDs, that when shut off, look like a normal LCD, but when turned on, are completely transparent. These are what we are going to be looking into next, as the lenses take a little finagling to get to work at the right angles, we also had an idea to use magnets, and metal shavings in a plexi box, so if you put an electromagnet plate behind the lisence, the shavings would jump up and completely block out the liscence.

I got the idea from this guy:

[KJS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The one problem I remember him not liking about them was that they can't be considered a moving violation since there is no actual cop present, it was more like a parking ticket than a speeding ticket so he thought a lot of people, if they ever knew that, wouldn't pay them.

[/ QUOTE ]

I got one of these at a red light in Chicago. They must not be able to make them a moving violation here either, because my insurance didn't go up and I was able to just get a sticker on the back of my driver's license to renew it since I'm a "Safe Driver" without a moving violation in the last four years.

[/ QUOTE ]

My understanding is that they can't hit you with a moving violation because there is no indisputable proof that you were the one operating the vehicle at the time of the infraction. That is what my friend here in Seattle heard when he tried to fight a ticket from a red light camera.

KJS

[rjoefish]

That's why they take pictures of the driver, so that they can at least prove it was them. I hear the pictures of the people are pretty good, better than say convenience store cameras, which are used to convict all the time.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Other than the fact that they're 100% anti-Constitutional, the cameras are fine.


[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Explain where these are prohibited in the Constitution.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures or measurements of speed, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYC

[thedustbustr]

[ QUOTE ]
the shavings would jump up and completely block out the liscence.

[/ QUOTE ]
i wouldn't buy that. i read somewhere that you can get polarized lenses that are perfectly legible until you hit it with bright light (i.e. an ez-pass flash).

[Edge34]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Other than the fact that they're 100% anti-Constitutional, the cameras are fine.


[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Explain where these are prohibited in the Constitution.

[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Amendment IV

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures or measurements of speed, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

[/ QUOTE ]

FYC

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL. Not even close...