They Can't Resist Red Light Cameras For Smc
- Thread starter royhobie
- Start date
You are correct that the red light cameras are coming. When I spoke to the Sheriff the other day, it strongly appears to me he is convinced this will be
beneficial. Notice I didn't say "for whom". The Sheriff did say that a number of people called him to support the cameras. He did not say there were any calls that did not support the cameras. I glad they knew the time to catch the Sheriff when he was in his office.
I am, and will continue to test the timing of the lights in St. Mary's. I fully expect some, but not all of the timing to change. If they change all of the timing, folks will become accustomed to the time sequence change. By not changing all of the lights, folks will assume one light is the same as the other. This is where the government will receive their additional income, until people adapt to the change.
Speaking of stimulating, how would you like to know where the law is on this? Many different challenges. Many didn't stick. Some did. Depending upon the judge's assoication with the camera companies, and the bodies of government in need of revenue which effects the judical decision. You have 6th Amendent, 14th Amendment, Hearsay Rule and the Equal Protection Clause. And that's for starters. Some folks tried for the 4th Amendent. But, it doesn't apply here since you, or an "agent" acting on your behalf (another wards, (has your car) is in public. I'll be going over these during the public presentation.
I understand where you are coming from and the whole fight the good fight stance, but don't you think you are beating a dead horse. These arguments have been made and the earlier decision affirmed. I don't know but good luck !
No doubt it is an up hill battle. In the process, I am sure I will probably upset some leaders of various County agencies. But, I have to go with what I know is right and wrong in life. The red light cameras are simply wrong. All about money and money only. They know it. A simple Google search provides some overwhelming evidence. I am hopeful it will be up to the people. I plan to provide a presentation to the Commissioners next month, which will be televised. I am hopeful this will reach up to some of our citizens and wake them up. I fully expect each and every Commissioner, especially their Prez to attempt to cut me off, although free speech and freedom of expression are supposed to be guaranteed.
The more I looked in to this, the more I found concern about equality within the law. For example, did you know that tractor trailer drivers who violate the red light cameras would not be cited? Neither will dump truck drivers whose tags you can not read because of mud over the tag, but "not" provided tickets for obstruction of their tag. When the average citizen covers their tag with mold, I assure you a trooper or deputy will pull you over. How about out of State drivers, such as Tennessee which do not require tags on their trailers? And rental vehicles? The ticket would go to the rental company. Do they pay the ticket? How do they force the driver to pay? How do they identify the driver? Depends upon how their rental contract reads I guess.
Nonetheless, the bottom line is the cameras assume you are "guilty" and YOU have to prove you are innocent. This seems to be the opposite of what our rule of law in our country stands for. Shouldn't we as a people stand by our rights as citizens, or do we allow our freedom and liberty to be trampled upon? And if we allow this intrusion, where do we stop it? Or do we continue to cower to what we are told by the "big brother"?
With that said, there has been a lot of lower and mid level court rulings about the cameras. The vast majority have been supportive. However, when you dig deeper, you will fine that the County or State in support had considerable economic problems. You will find that Counties or States without economic problems don't want them. I was told recently by one of our "County Agency leaders" that Montgomery County loves their red light cameras. I was surprised since I thought they are one of the richest counties in the State. As it turns out, they too have a deficit. No wonder why they like the cameras. I read in just a few months, the cameras made them millions.
The rental company will pass the ticket - err - charge the credit card - of the party that rented the car during the period the citation was alleged to have been issued.
I know, I had my credit card charged. Trying to figure out the charge I learned that I car I was driving, or more exactly the license plate for the car I was renting, was snapped by a speed camera. Problem was that I was over a 1000 miles a way. Didn't stop the rental company from chargng my credit card. In the end I got the credit, it took some reasoning and some yelling about the pitfalls of affirmative action when you hire the mentally handicapped, but I got a credit. My concern is that the company gave my name and license to the state in which the "infraction" occurred and they in turn passed that information to Maryland.
It was easy for them to issue the credit, but they would have had to noitfy the company that serviced the system who in turn would have had to contact the state they were under contract with. All of whom didn't care since they got their money.
I know, I had my credit card charged. Trying to figure out the charge I learned that I car I was driving, or more exactly the license plate for the car I was renting, was snapped by a speed camera. Problem was that I was over a 1000 miles a way. Didn't stop the rental company from chargng my credit card. In the end I got the credit, it took some reasoning and some yelling about the pitfalls of affirmative action when you hire the mentally handicapped, but I got a credit. My concern is that the company gave my name and license to the state in which the "infraction" occurred and they in turn passed that information to Maryland.
It was easy for them to issue the credit, but they would have had to noitfy the company that serviced the system who in turn would have had to contact the state they were under contract with. All of whom didn't care since they got their money.
L
Localboy
Guest
Please get a life, and leave the public and public officials alone. You are all over the map with different causes to push and in different Counties. I remember one link where you were CRYING that Calvert County schools would not take your advice or help with bullying. I told you before if your knowledge was so great people would pay you for it. But no one wants it and thats why they won't even take it for free.
Also I'm still waiting to hear what department you worked for.
glhs837
Power with Control
I do know what department he worked for, and yes, he was a sworn officer. Why is bringing factual information to the officials making a choice that affects everyone a bad thing? Especially since they appear to be cherry picking their data to support the choice they have already made. This way, when the citizens want heads to roll for being used like rented mules, there will be no hiding behind "Oh, I had no idea"
This way, it's p[public record that they were given this information, and they chose to ignore it.
This way, it's p[public record that they were given this information, and they chose to ignore it.
the cameras only take a picture, they don't determine anything but do provide in 99% of cases evidence that a traffic signal was red while you passed through it.... the other 1% of people should check the box for a hearing
or better yet keep your vehicle under control so that you can react properly to traffic signals....
Thanks Bernie; that's interesting! As you mentioned, your name is in the system, even though you were a thousand miles away. The state will just put you down as the person caught by the camera. The rental company will never tell the state the straight story because they would look like idiots. In order to make sure it is straight, you need an attorney and take them to court. An expense most people will not want to have. Therefore, the ugly scenerio will never change.
I can tell you that our Commissioners are sold on the cameras. The cameras are etched in stone for St. Mary's County. In order to sway their "already made decision", I will need to provide them overwhelming concrete evidence that the cameras are not about safety and in fact, the cameras increase accidents. The main thing I would like to demostrate is that the data for the need of cameras in St. Mary's County isn't there. "It never has been". I have asked for it multiple times. For some reason, the powers to be that control this data is dragging their feet. I'm not sure why?
Last edited:
glhs837
Power with Control
I did a couple of freedom of information requests, Roy, and was told that you couldnt drill down to that level of detail. It comes under "failure to obey traffic signal", but thats not just red lights, but any sign that tells you what to do, stop, yield, whatever.
Face it, it's gonna happen, no matter what evidence you present. Like you say, for them it's a win-win, and any data showing otherwise will be dismissed.And the odds of getting them to add in provisions that make it better are slim to none. Sincve we do not have accurate before data, there will be no way to produce comparative data to show that they made no difference.
But the people in the county will eventually wise up and demand they be removed, just watch. 3-5 years tops, I think.
Face it, it's gonna happen, no matter what evidence you present. Like you say, for them it's a win-win, and any data showing otherwise will be dismissed.And the odds of getting them to add in provisions that make it better are slim to none. Sincve we do not have accurate before data, there will be no way to produce comparative data to show that they made no difference.
But the people in the county will eventually wise up and demand they be removed, just watch. 3-5 years tops, I think.
You're probably right. But, I can't give up. There has to be some morals and values of what is right and wrong in life. They see dollar signs that they quickly claim is all about safety. The Sheriff said the "data" will have to show the need for cameras. I need to find what "data" he is using, if any. Also, a month or so ago Sheriff Cameron had an article in the Enterprise about red light cameras. You probably remember the article. Remember the pedestrian accidents? It seems like they were trying to be linked to intersections, and thus to red light violations. At least, this is what it appeared to me. A form of subliminal message. It leaves this impression for the pubic. I suspect none of the pedestrian accidents had anything to do with red light violations. In fact, none, or very few had anything to do with traffic light controled intersections?
Ironically, the County Commissioners wife was hit by a red light violator. I doubt the Commisioner will understand that if there was a red light camera, all it would do is take a picture of they guy hitting his wife and the guy would get a $75.00 ticket. It would not stop someone from violating a red light if they choose to do so. In fact, I wonder about double jeporady had a police officer issued a ticket to the person that hit his wife. I don't know if both are thrown out, or can they decide which ticket is used? I asked Sheriff Cameron this question. He said it would be up to the judge. I plan to meet with the District Court Judge for St. Mary's County to get the answer to this.
$75.00 in Maryland is only a start for when they get their foot in the door for the majority of the counties. Then Maryland, a tax happy state will crank up the charge for cameras. I expect the charge will double within 2 to 3 years after the cameras are in place. I looked at other states that have them. They started low like Maryland and cranked the price up. WAY up! I provided the Sheriff documents from studies that show red light cameras are not the answer. If this is about safety as they claim, the answer to reduce side impact crashes is to extend the amber cycle of the traffic lights. Several studies have shown that this is the real answer.
I will be attending a County Highway Safety Board meeting on February 19th. I'll be bringing up this issue again. I also plan to attend the County Commissioners meeting and explain to them that the County Highway Safety Board voted for an issue with only one side heard. And therefore, they were not totally informed before making a decision. I talked to Senator Dyson. He said he is totally against red light cameras.
smibarines
New Member
smibarines
New Member
TPD
the poor dad
New law to take effect in 2012 in Illinois -
Motorcyclists stopped at a red light may proceed through if it fails to change to green after a reasonable length of time.
Read more: No More Happy Hour In Utah? New State Laws Set To Ring In 2012 | Fox News
Explain this one to the red-light enforcers!
Motorcyclists stopped at a red light may proceed through if it fails to change to green after a reasonable length of time.
Read more: No More Happy Hour In Utah? New State Laws Set To Ring In 2012 | Fox News
Explain this one to the red-light enforcers!
I submit that every time any person drives a car, they violate some traffic law. Did you come to a complete stop when you pull out of your driveway, came to the stop sign, or when you made a right turn on red? Not slow and go, but a complete stop. Did you signal every time you made a turn or lane change? At any time during your trip, did you exceed the speed limit? How about when going down a steep hill? Did you brake to stay below the speed limit? Did you drift onto the shoulder or over the centerline??
Since safety is the ONLY concern for people who endorse red light cameras, why stop at red light cameras?? With GPS and wireless technology, the government has the capability to watch your car the whole time it is being driven. Every one of the above infractions (and more) can be determined with GPS coupled with the information new cars monitor and record (speed can be determined with GPS only). For efficiency reasons, Traffic Control, Inc (or whoever wins the contract) will send you a monthly bill detailing your infractions. Speaking of efficiency, since Eye-in-the-Sky will be watching your every move, fewer police officers will be required. You think the Eye-in-the-Sky made a mistake, it will be up to you to prove it.
Since safety is the only consideration, why not???
Since safety is the ONLY concern for people who endorse red light cameras, why stop at red light cameras?? With GPS and wireless technology, the government has the capability to watch your car the whole time it is being driven. Every one of the above infractions (and more) can be determined with GPS coupled with the information new cars monitor and record (speed can be determined with GPS only). For efficiency reasons, Traffic Control, Inc (or whoever wins the contract) will send you a monthly bill detailing your infractions. Speaking of efficiency, since Eye-in-the-Sky will be watching your every move, fewer police officers will be required. You think the Eye-in-the-Sky made a mistake, it will be up to you to prove it.
Since safety is the only consideration, why not???