Speed Monitoring Violation

B

BernieP

Resident PIA
Justme2 said:
Yep! That's what I would do too! And then think about who will be driving my car again.
Click to expand...

that's what they are counting on. Problem is, the systems are not infallible. There are plenty of jurisdictions that have thrown out the systems because of legal and technical problems.
MD and DC have chosen to ignore those issues even while courts have dismissed a far larger number of tickets than people are led to believe.
 
TPD

TPD

the poor dad
A family member recently got a speed camera ticket from DC. The date & time are wrong on the pictures but it is the family member's vehicle. What are you supposed to do in a case like this? The date is the day before the person was actually there and according to the time stamp it should have been dark, but the picture is clearly daylight. Yeah, we want this in St Mary's County!
 
B

BernieP

Resident PIA
TPD said:
A family member recently got a speed camera ticket from DC. The date & time are wrong on the pictures but it is the family member's vehicle. What are you supposed to do in a case like this? The date is the day before the person was actually there and according to the time stamp it should have been dark, but the picture is clearly daylight. Yeah, we want this in St Mary's County!
Click to expand...

It's a machine that has been checked, rechecked, calibrated and certified. It cannot be wrong. Please direct God to change the calendar to coincide with the date / time of the camera.
 
Xbox360

Xbox360

Major Nelson is my hero
Goldenhawk said:
According to this link posted yesterday, you do NOT have to "rat out" the driver, no matter what the outdated paperwork on the form stipulates. But it will probably take a visit to see the judge to convince him of this, because they don't like to let anyone out of that valuable fine.
Click to expand...

Just claim you were passed out drunk in the car and you don't remember who the driver was.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
vince77 said:
I'd write it off to bad luck, they have a 95% accuracy rate.
Click to expand...

According to? And even if that's so, why should we accept that 5 out of every 100 tickets are wrong. Would we accept that error rate in any other aspect of law enforcement?
 
V

vince77

Active Member
glhs837 said:
According to? And even if that's so, why should we accept that 5 out of every 100 tickets are wrong. Would we accept that error rate in any other aspect of law enforcement?
Click to expand...

There are quite a few references to that 95% figure, google it. And I will accept that 95% accuracy as acceptable. My decision making is not 95% accurate, is yours? Expecting 100% accuracy in any aspect of life is unrealistic.
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
So, you don't have one :) If I can't have 100%, I should have enough transparency that fixing bad ones is easy. But that costs money. And since money is the real reason these even exist, anything that intereres with the revenue stream gets ####ecanned. S0 they play shell games with accuracy numbers and data, and make the system hard to fight to increase the chances you will just adopt your attitude.

http://www.mddriversalliance.org/

Do some reading. And this sort of thing is the rule not the exception. And lastly, there is still the basic point that if the only reason for the enforcement is to raise money, it should not be done.
 
B

BernieP

Resident PIA
http://photoradarscam.com/malfunctions.php

Complaints are not isolated to the US.

What is amusing is the rationale for putting cameras in place, in Chicago it's gong to make the city safer and raise $30 million - so riddle me this, if everyone slows down, how does the system not only pay of itself but raise $330 million for the city?
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
Ah, Chicago, the jewel of automated enforcement. A stellar example of how such a system should be run. Saving citizens, making money....... like a freakin Reeses Peanut Butter Cup of law enforcement.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/...light-cameras-lawsuit-met-20150324-story.html

"Chicago's red light camera system grew to more than 350 cameras and has raised more than $500 million in $100 tickets since 2002. Tribune investigations beginning in 2012 have exposed corruption, failed oversight and inconsistent enforcement in the program."

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2015/09...-speed-cameras-nowhere-near-schools-or-parks/

"The second camera is at 4909 North Cicero, right along the Edens Expressway. It’s the No. 1 ticket producer for the city, issuing 51,075 tickets so far this year. That’s $1.7 million dollars in revenue for the city.

“I believe it’s a revenue-generating tool,” says Mike Brockway, a consumer advocate and traffic blogger. He believes the cameras do little to protect children.

“I’m sure people are asking, ‘Where’s this park? Is it right on the expressway?’” he says.

In reality, it’s a couple of blocks south and one block west of Cicero Avenue."

I will not even begin on Chicagos RLC program, that has already seen criminal prosecutions of I think three officials.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/watchdog/redlight/
 
V

vince77

Active Member
glhs837 said:
So, you don't have one :) If I can't have 100%, I should have enough transparency that fixing bad ones is easy. But that costs money. And since money is the real reason these even exist, anything that intereres with the revenue stream gets ####ecanned. S0 they play shell games with accuracy numbers and data, and make the system hard to fight to increase the chances you will just adopt your attitude.

http://www.mddriversalliance.org/

Do some reading. And this sort of thing is the rule not the exception. And lastly, there is still the basic point that if the only reason for the enforcement is to raise money, it should not be done.
Click to expand...

Basing your argument against something based on an advocacy groups position is comical. happy travels. There's usually a penalty when you break rules/laws in society.
 
Last edited:
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
While the things are indeed posted there, that doesn't make the facts presented wrong. I post things from Huffpo all the time, if I judge the information to be presented to be factually accurate. If you want to decide based on where the information is located vice what the actual information is, then I would say your position is the comical one. "My ind is made up, don't bother me with facts", that's a comical attitude. He provides documents to back every assertion. So, if you lack the facts to debate the point, that's fine, but just admit that.

I agree with paying a penalty when you break the law, always have. I object to enforcing the law as a for-profit enterprise. I cannot think of a quicker way to entice the system to not be honest. Remove the profit motive and make the system more transparent to fixing errors, I would endorse it wholeheartedly. I never complained about Charles Counties system when it was "organic" and run at a loss. But now it's a vendor run system, and so suspect. Would you be okay with a system where deputies were allowed to keep a percentage of every citation they issue?
 
V

vince77

Active Member
glhs837 said:
While the things are indeed posted there, that doesn't make the facts presented wrong. I post things from Huffpo all the time, if I judge the information to be presented to be factually accurate. If you want to decide based on where the information is located vice what the actual information is, then I would say your position is the comical one. "My ind is made up, don't bother me with facts", that's a comical attitude. He provides documents to back every assertion. So, if you lack the facts to debate the point, that's fine, but just admit that.

I agree with paying a penalty when you break the law, always have. I object to enforcing the law as a for-profit enterprise. I cannot think of a quicker way to entice the system to not be honest. Remove the profit motive and make the system more transparent to fixing errors, I would endorse it wholeheartedly. I never complained about Charles Counties system when it was "organic" and run at a loss. But now it's a vendor run system, and so suspect. Would you be okay with a system where deputies were allowed to keep a percentage of every citation they issue?
Click to expand...

Here's what HuffPo published a few years ago from a NY State assemblyman concerning speed cameras..

"The statistics show that speed cameras have been proven useful tools by the 12 other U.S. states that currently employ them as well as Washington D.C., Canada, Australia, Italy and the United Kingdom. Washington D.C., for example, has reported that the number of drivers aggressively speeding has significantly decreased from 17 percent to 1.9 percent since the speed cameras were installed. Overseas, the United Kingdom found that speed cameras reduced the number of those killed or seriously injured by 40 percent, reduced collisions by 33 percent, and reduced speeding by an astounding 71 percent at the sites the cameras had been installed. More locally, we now know that in New York City there are more deaths attributed to speeding each year than drunk driving and drugged driving combined. It is my hope that the benefits seen by other municipalities utilizing speed cameras will be replicated not only in Staten Island, but throughout all of New York City."


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/matthew-titone/speed-cameras-new-york_b_1867431.html
 
glhs837

glhs837

Power with Control
So, you cite a politician lobbying for revenue generating cameras who says stats show a thing. The only real numbers are the UK ones.....

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-10762590

And the funny thing is, they, like DC and so many other places, have ridden an overall reduction in crash rates all over, in all places, not just places with camera enforcement. The decreases they cite can be found anywhere. Cars are getting safer, reducing the severity of injuries.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top